The racism behind anti-immigration rhetoric is palpable to every immigrant. Including me.

  
Via:  perrie-halpern  •  2 weeks ago  •  114 comments

By:   Alan Cumming

The racism behind anti-immigration rhetoric is palpable to every immigrant. Including me.
The idea that if you're pro-immigrant, you're anti-America, and if you're anti-immigration, you are pro-America is completely wrong.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


America is such a young country: It's only a few hundred years old, and no one who has been here for only a few generations is without an immigrant connection. So, from the outside — from a place like Europe — the idea that Americans are not connected to immigration and our immigrant pasts seems like we are denying ourselves. We sound very self-hating about the very notion of immigration, but we're actually just confusing racism with a desire to fix the immigration system.

I see that all the time: Things that are being said about immigration and the ideals of immigration are basically just being used as a thinly veiled form of racism. It's so blatant. The president himself actually said he doesn't mind people coming   from countries like Norway   — white people; it's the people from " shithole countries " he doesn't want. It seems almost pedantic and obsolete to actually have to talk about the fact that it's racism.

The contributions of all immigrants has been so derided by our present administration, so I felt that I needed to celebrate immigration rather than have it openly derided. Also, I wanted to try to make people stand back and just see the anti-immigration propaganda that they were being fed, and understand instead how this country is what it is because of immigration. That was the genesis of my cabaret show ( now an Audible book ) "Legal Immigrant."

The whole point of the show was to tell my experience from my perspective as immigrant, but also to show that I'm feeling these negative things about being an immigrant and I'm a white man of privilege; I can't imagine what it must be like for people of color or Muslims. I don't know the exact percentage, but I would say that, the day I became an American, at least 75 percent of the other people being sworn in with me were people of color.

So I wanted to try and make people stand back from this vehemence and have some fun while analyzing what was going on. I don't want to be didactic, though: I understand that there are problems with the immigration system; I understand there's a massive refugee problem in the world. But I will not condone racism or bigotry as part of that debate.

That doesn't mean I'm not open to dialogue. I like when people engage, that's why I do theater. I don't want to just be behind a screen; I actually enjoy the fact that I can hear how people are reacting to me. And I've been heckled doing the show — from both sides. I want to hear what people have to say and I totally engage with some people. A couple of times it got quite rowdy, but that's why I wanted to do these cabarets. They're good ways to get people to engage and be provoked, and to maybe change their minds ... or at least consider other options. And, at the end of the show, I make everyone in the audience sing "The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow," so I'm obviously someone who likes bringing people together, even though I also like provoking them.

There's a thing in this country right now: Any dissent against the president or any disagreement with his views is seen as a red flag and people immediately respond in an aggressive way. People are just screaming at one another right now; it makes it very difficult to engage. And so, aside from trying to celebrate immigration, I'm trying to get people to also stand back and try to not let the tropes of this awful rhetoric blind us to what is actually going on.

This government is trying to brainwash its citizens into believing that the very thing that has made America what it is and has made America great — immigration — is a negative thing. That is complete doublespeak. The idea that if you're pro-immigrant, you're anti-America, and if you're anti-immigration, you are pro-America is completely wrong. That's not just my opinion; if you stand back from it and look at the history of this country, you can't deny that is the truth.

I really do believe that people have lost the power of analysis in this country because of the duality of the political system: Politics in this country is a team sport. I also think that, with people like Betsy DeVos running the Education Department, it's going to take a long time before we have a generation who can regain the powers of analysis. It's all a multilayered effort to dumb us down, in order to be able to brainwash us and feed us propaganda. We need to stand up and take heed before it's too late.

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Gulliver-Swift
1  Gulliver-Swift    2 weeks ago

Thanks to Alan Cumming for weighing in so eloquently.

But it needs to be added that the racism is palpable to non-immigrants too.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
2  Buzz of the Orient    2 weeks ago

There is nothing wrong, and no racism, with admitting LEGAL immigrants who have been properly vetted and their history competently checked.  Taking into consideration the lowering of the birth rate recently reported, causing a population reduction, immigration is a necessity.

 
 
 
Kavika
3  Kavika     2 weeks ago

Since my ancestors have been on Turtle Island since the beginning it's not all that difficult to see racism. Of course, those that have never experienced it will deny that it exists. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
4  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    2 weeks ago

The open borders narrative is promoted by racist and greedy billionaires like Bloomberg and the Koch brothers. They chose cheap labor over African Americans who are the most adversely affected by their lust for earnings.

The electorate overwhelmingly supports a secure border and immigration policies that don't deprive poor and minority citizens opportunity, employment and fair wages.

In 2016 we saw their super pacs spin the narrative that anyone opposed to open borders are racists. It failed and continues to fail.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1  MUVA  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4    2 weeks ago

Some are not able to see the difference between legal and illegal immigration.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
4.1.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  MUVA @4.1    2 weeks ago
Some are not able to see the difference between legal and illegal immigration.

Maybe they don't know the difference between the two.  And they go about their day blissfully ignorant.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.2  MUVA  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

I think a good part of their leadership for sure doesn't know the difference. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4.1.3  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  MUVA @4.1.2    2 weeks ago
I think a good part of their leadership for sure doesn't know the difference.

the leadership on the left knows damn good and well what the difference is.  they purposely conflate illegal and legal immigration to push their agenda of trying to change our culture and our country into a socialist shit hole.

 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
4.1.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.3    2 weeks ago
they purposely conflate illegal and legal immigration to push their agenda of trying to change our culture and our country into a socialist shit hole.

It doesn't help that the lemmings on the left don't seem to understand that what they're pushing doesn't work and will destroy this country as it has in every other country that tried it.  

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4.1.5  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.4    2 weeks ago
It doesn't help that the lemmings on the left don't seem to understand that what they're pushing doesn't work and will destroy this country as it has in every other country that tried it.

I think most of them know that.  and they don't care as long as they get what they want without working for it.... "public goods"  

thieves and socialists have a lot in common. so don't expect much from them other than feigned morality

cheers :)

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
4.1.6  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.3    2 weeks ago

The real push for Open borders is coming from super pacs created and funded by billionaires for the sole purpose of cheap labor. These super pacs visit every one of us in our local elections with ads and crony propaganda.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
4.1.7  Dean Moriarty  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4.1.6    2 weeks ago

I have a hard time seeing anything wrong with cheap labor. To me it represents the free market. I have to win all of my work on competitive bid. If I can't produce the product at a competitive price I don't get the work. It is the same with a person selling their skill on an hourly basis. If a Mexican is willing to do the work for less than a black here why does the black chose not to be competitive? What does he have to gain by not working? My position is the same as the Libertarian platform. 

3.4 Free Trade and Migration

We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
4.1.8  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Dean Moriarty @4.1.7    2 weeks ago

With 63% of Illegal immigrants falling in to the welfare system that directly obstructs your liberty as you are forced to participate in their welfare, there is a need for a border and immigration system. That way those who won't have a means to support themselves don't deprive citizens of rights.

I am 100% for legal immigration and free trade. I also do not support government mandated wages.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1.9  XDm9mm  replied to  Dean Moriarty @4.1.7    2 weeks ago
I have a hard time seeing anything wrong with cheap labor.

The problem is how that labor is obtained.

Using illegal aliens as opposed to citizens is a non-starter.  The illegal is essentially taking the position of a citizen or legal resident immigrant, and returning little if anything to the 'community' at large other than what's required for immediate sustenance.  Then a very large portion of those earnings the illegal receive return to his/her home country.

Prior to the housing bust, there were thousands of illegal aliens working in the housing construction industry.   In one case, a three bedroom townhouse in Herndon VA was raided and more than 100 illegal aliens were found to be living there.  So, how can anyone here legally compete against that?  One family renting or buying a townhouse is appreciably more costly to the wage earner than over 100 people sharing the rent for that same townhouse.

Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.

Sorry Dean....   if you can't compete with your competitors using legal means, maybe you shouldn't be in a competitive business.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
4.1.10  Dean Moriarty  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4.1.8    2 weeks ago

Yes I see the problem as the welfare system and not competitive wages based on a free market value. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
4.1.11  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Dean Moriarty @4.1.10    2 weeks ago

The open borders billionaires want to reap the benefit of cheap labor and force you and I to contribute to the immigrant's welfare via government. That is what I am opposed to.

That is a massive anal throttling to the US tax payer.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
4.1.12  Jasper2529  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.3    2 weeks ago
the leadership on the left knows damn good and well what the difference is.  they purposely conflate illegal and legal immigration to push their agenda of trying to change our culture and our country into a socialist shit hole.

Very true. The author and left wing leaders are deliberately pushing left-wing propaganda. 

Under federal law , any non-U.S. citizen is an alien. Aliens who have entered the United States without permission, or who have violated the terms of their admission, are identified under the law as illegal aliens. That is a fact, not an issue for debate.

The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.
—United States Code, Title 8, §1101(a)(3)

An illegal alien…is any alien (1) whose most recent entry into the United States was without inspection, or (2) whose most recent admission to the United States was as a nonimmigrant and—(A) whose period of authorized stay as a nonimmigrant expired, or (B) whose unlawful status was known to the Government, before the date of the commission of the crime for which the alien is convicted.
—United States Code, Title 8, §1365(b)

https://www.fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/illegal-alien-proper-terminology

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.13  Ender  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4.1.8    2 weeks ago

https://cis.org/Report/63-NonCitizen-Households-Access-Welfare-Programs

I had a little time today so I read that. I admit the charts and findings are hard to figure out. They even say themselves that they can't pinpoint one program that would be an overall main cause.

Even when EIC is taken out of the equation it only drops to like 58, even though EIC is a large portion

It also states that a lot of the healthcare is for not the illegal per say but their kids that were born here and are citizens.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4.1.11    2 weeks ago

Agreed.

Immigrants should be fully self-supporting--for themselves and their offspring, no matter where that offspring is born.

I believe that is just plain common sense.

 
 
 
Steve Ott
4.2  Steve Ott  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4    2 weeks ago
The open borders narrative is promoted by racist and greedy billionaires like Bloomberg and the Koch brothers.

Not necessarily: The Center for a Stateless Society

The idea of open border comes from the idea that the premise of the Peace of Westphalia is flawed and more.It is a non-racist, community based idea of humanity.

 
 
 
Krishna
4.3  Krishna  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4    one week ago
The electorate overwhelmingly supports a secure border

Not according to Donald Trump.

He continually rants and raves about how the Democrats want "open borders"-- and how they want more illegal immigration rather than the "legal" immigration he wants. And

He claims that the electorate does not "overwhelmingly"  want secure borders, that the Democrats want Mexico to send us more Drug dealers and rapists and only the Republicans want secure borders!

 
 
 
zuksam
5  zuksam    2 weeks ago

The Idea that if a person is anti-immigration they must be racist is foolish. It's an Idea that is promoted by some on the Left to silence opposition to open borders and lax enforcement of immigration law. There are tens of millions of Democrats who know that illegal immigration is out of control and must be stopped but they fear being labeled a racist so they remain silent. The Idea that because we are a nation of immigrants we have no right to regulate immigration or deny entry to anyone is ludicrous. It is not only our right but our responsibility to regulate immigration, we need to weigh the pro's and con's and determine how many and what skill levels of immigrants we allow in this country. Unfettered Illegal Immigration has negatively impacted our most vulnerable citizens (the poor and unskilled) by suppressing wages and driving up housing costs. We will always have immigration but we are under no obligation to allow our country to become overpopulated or negatively impacted by huge numbers of skilled or unskilled labor. Our first and foremost responsibility is to our own Citizens and Legal Residents and any and all immigration should be regulated and for the good of the Country as a whole.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7  Vic Eldred    2 weeks ago

What a misleading strawman argument this is!  Who is against simple immigration?  

How many people immigrate legally to the US?

"More than 44.5 million immigrants resided in the United States in 2017, the historical high since census records have been kept. One in seven U.S. residents is foreign born, according to 2017 American Community Survey (ACS) data. While immigrants’ current share—13.7 percent—of the overall U.S. population (325.7 million people) has been increasing since the record low marked in 1970, it remains below the historical record of 14.8 percent hit in 1890."

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states

Hardly sounds like a racist policy to me, but then again the what the article above might really be arguing for is open borders and and maybe the complete abandonment of American sovereignty along with the concept of citizenship. Oh ya, and the smearing of descent Americans as racist. What a progressive thing to do!



Malcolm X said that ‘The white Liberal is the worst enemy to America, and the worst enemy to the black man.”

image-32.jpg?resize=370%2C280

Me thinks he was right on that one!

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
7.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Vic Eldred @7    2 weeks ago

Funny thing is Perrie told me all of these featured seeds from leftist NBC are non-political. 

https://thenewstalkers.com/perrie-halpern/group/165/metafied#cm1082222

 
 
 
XDm9mm
7.1.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Dean Moriarty @7.1    2 weeks ago
featured seeds from leftist NBC are non-political. 

That all depends on the time of day and how the wind is blowing.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
7.1.2  Jasper2529  replied to  Dean Moriarty @7.1    2 weeks ago

Interesting, indeed. From what I've seen, a good percentage of the featured articles are, to some extent, political in nature.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.3  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  XDm9mm @7.1.1    2 weeks ago

Look back on my seeds on my homepage. See how many are political. The answer is almost none. But this one got me since, like  Alan Cumming, who is from Scottland, my mum has been a nationalized citizen in the US, and she said she kind of felt the same way. So does my daughter's boyfriend who is from Italy. The feeling is not being welcomed, which is odd of immigrants. 

I understand the need for border security. But I don't like the rhetoric that goes along with it. 

I was not going to make any commentary here. But since Dean is trying to play "gotchya" followed up by the usual from 9mm (nice little jab about NBC being leftist... what are you implying there about me?) and Jasper too, I figured I needed to set the record straight. 

So please, go to my homepage and check out the articles I have posted. Please count up the number of political articles. I won't hold my breath for an apology. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.3    2 weeks ago

Some people love to babble Perrie, dontcha know. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
7.1.5  Jack_TX  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.3    2 weeks ago
(nice little jab about NBC being leftist... what are you implying there about me?

Well.....NBC sorta is leftist.

You're not, but they are.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
7.1.6  Sean Treacy  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.3    2 weeks ago
from Scottland, my mum has been a nationalized citizen in the US, and she said she kind of felt the same way. So does my daughter's boyfriend who is from Italy

So your examples undercut the premise of the article.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.7  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jack_TX @7.1.5    2 weeks ago

Thanks Jack. I am glad you get the difference.

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
7.1.8  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.7    2 weeks ago

I have a psychological test I administrate to determine how left a closet lefty may be. Let me know if i can pn the test. Some of the images are NSFW.

After the ink blot part I can then certify you on the site publicly.

The test for the righties is a little different. It only has two questions and two pictures. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.9  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.1.6    2 weeks ago

How am I undercutting my argument, Sean? My mom has been an American citizen for over 60 years. When she became a citizen, it wasn't like it is now. My daughter's boyfriend, on the other hand, had the rules changed the moment Trump came to office. They changed the rules for the H1B and he had to leave and work for his company in England. It took him 2 more years to get back to the US, and this was with company lawyers fighting on his behalf.

Very welcoming/ not.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.10  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @7.1.8    2 weeks ago
After the ink blot part I can then certify you on the site publicly.

Who's going to certify you? 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
7.1.11  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.10    2 weeks ago

I've been certified by the Ludwig Von Mises Institute.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
7.1.12  Sean Treacy  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.9    2 weeks ago

Perrie, you claimed your scots  mother and the Italian boyfriend didn’t feel welcomed. That would be the opposite of racism. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.13  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @7.1.11    2 weeks ago

The professor

ba2415af-fe99-4ea6-8743-72aa7e75d0b6_1.e

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.14  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.1.12    2 weeks ago

Sean,

Me mum is English and yes my daughter's boyfriend is Italian. But the reason both feel that way, is because of what happened to my daughter's boyfriend. He was the only one to get his H1B. None of the Indian applicants got theirs and remained in England. It didn't go unnoticed. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
7.1.15  Jasper2529  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.3    2 weeks ago
and Jasper too

Please leave me out of that jab. In comment 7.1.2 I specifically said ...

From what I've seen, a good percentage of the featured articles  are , to some extent , political in nature.

And yes, I looked at your pages of seeds. I found 3 somewhat politica l articles on the first 3 pages.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.16  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.1.15    2 weeks ago

List them. I make every attempt not to pick political articles, but life is full of politics even in the abstract, so I would like to see what you call political. 

And that wasn't a jab. If someone is going to say something about me, they should back it up. I wouldn't expect anything different from you. 

 
 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
7.1.19  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.13    2 weeks ago

512

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.20  JohnRussell  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.1.15    2 weeks ago

So what if she seeds "political" articles? 

Perrie is rather scrupulous to maintain her independence in terms of what party she supports. She is neither Democrat or Republican. 

Just because she doesnt praise Trump doesnt make her a liberal.  No one in their right mind supports Trump, and in fact there are many "never Trumper" Republicans.  

 
 
 
Jasper2529
7.1.21  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.20    2 weeks ago
Perrie is rather scrupulous to maintain her independence in terms of what party she supports. She is neither Democrat or Republican. 

I, too, am an Independent voter - neither Democrat nor Republican.

Just because she doesnt praise Trump doesnt make her a liberal.  No one in their right mind supports Trump, and in fact there are many "never Trumper" Republicans.  

Other than this comment, please specify exactly where I have mentioned Trump in any of my comments on this seed.

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
7.1.22  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.20    2 weeks ago

No one is buying your kissing up to Perrie shtick, you forget we've all seen the endless Meta you've written over the years complaining.

A day late and a dollar short homeslice.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.23  JohnRussell  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.1.21    2 weeks ago

There is no rule or guideline that someone who replies to a comment can only comment on what the first person said or who they named.  Sorry. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.24  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.1.18    2 weeks ago

That is 3 in 30 articles. I just checked. The second one I remember not being able to find a story that wasn't political, other than local news. The last one barely has anything to do with politics. The issue was felons voting. And if you went on from there, I checked and there were pages without a single political article. 

So, I'll give you to some extent, but your comment said:

Interesting, indeed. From what I've seen, a good percentage of the featured articlesare, to some extent, political in nature.

10% is hardly a good percentage. And if you average it out, it's even less.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.25  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @7.1.22    2 weeks ago
No one is buying your kissing up to Perrie shtick

I'd say something nice about your comments too if I could think of anything. 

 
 
 
JBB
7.1.26  JBB  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.1.21    2 weeks ago

Show us where you discussed the topic...

Whatever point you're making is not on it.

The fact remains that many like yourself certainly appear to be only prejudiced against the poor mostly brown skinned refugees now seeking new lives in America the same as your own ancestors came here seeking opportunities and freedom and to escape persecution. 

Not that many rich white Europeans are seeking official refuge status. Which is legal. Rhey fly in, hire lawyers and then overstay their visas indefinitely.  

The virulent responses to Mr Cumming's musings just goes to show how simple minded are many of those most opposed to immigration. You'd think a "Nation of Immigrants" would be more welcoming. The fact remains that contrary to popular belief each wave of oppressed immigrants who ever came here contributed way way way more to us all both socially and economically than the small burdens entailed in their initial assimilations...

 
 
 
Enoch
7.1.27  Enoch  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.9    2 weeks ago

Dear Friend and Site Hostess with the Mostess Perrie: Mrs. E. is a Tzabarit (Native born Israeli).

When we came to American from her native Israel, and following the normal legal nationalization process over some years she became a U.S. Citizen.

Mrs. E. after all these decades has a thick heavy accent.

After almost half a century she is still made to feel like an outsider, without respect to her race, or the fact that she is according to U.S. law as much a citizen as anyone born and raised here.

For her (and therefore for me and our offspring) the issue is not rascism.

It is marginalization due to bigotry agaisnt those who are deemed to be different than "real Americans".

Exclusion based on any second class status making factors is not consistent with American values.

We cannot say, as it written on the Statue of Liberty, "Give us your poor tired --- etc". and in the same breath demonize those not porn here who came here, and are trying to fit in and be a productive part of American life. 

I hear you and what the article says.

We cannot be the home of the free and the brave treating anyone as subhuman just because of an accident of birth.

We need to take each person, and their case on a one by one individual basis.

Diversity is a strength.

Coming together where possible another virtue.

Peace and Abundant Blessings Always.

Enoch.

 

 
 
 
JBB
7.1.28  JBB  replied to  Enoch @7.1.27    2 weeks ago

I am confident then that you can feel empathy for recent refugee here who also have the disadvantages of being physically identifiable as "the others". The Unwanted...

People do not just up and leave their homes, their friends and their families to go through what the desperate people at our southern border currently suffer. It had to be bad. 

Race is only one element of prejudice but it is one of its ugliest aspects. Many still speak of Judaism as if it were a race of men and not merely a faith. If you do not believe me, just listen to the hateful rhetoric still used by The KKK, Skin Heads, Aryan Nations, American Nazi and Republicans...

 
 
 
Ender
7.1.29  Ender  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.24    2 weeks ago

One I remember you stated you really didn't want to post a political article yet it was the only one you could find on the subject.

Then another was to counter an article already on the site.

 
 
 
Ender
7.1.30  Ender  replied to  Enoch @7.1.27    2 weeks ago

As always Enoch, well stated.

I think in real life people are not at odds as much as online. I think online personas are more of an exaggeration than the norm.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.31  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.3    2 weeks ago
The feeling is not being welcomed,

Any group who came here in one of the great waves knows the feeling, as a matter of fact they all faced full blown ethnic discrimination. Yet none of them - not the Russian Jews, nor the Irish, nor the Italians made a peep about it - they assimilated! Today we are dealing with ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!!! The Illegals have advocates, organizations, Univision and the democratic party on a crusade for them. Part of that crusade involves calling American citizens "racist."

 
 
 
Jasper2529
7.1.32  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.31    2 weeks ago
Any group who came here in one of the great waves knows the feeling, as a matter of fact they all faced full blown ethnic discrimination. Yet none of them - not the Russian Jews, nor the Irish, nor the Italians made a peep about it - they assimilated!Today we are dealing with ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!!! The Illegals have advocates, organizations, Univision and the democratic party on a crusade for them. Part of that crusade involves calling American citizens "racist."

This is what the current bleeding heart Give me your tired ... poor refugees defenders of illegal aliens do not want to acknowledge. As someone else said, they are conflating LEGAL and ILLEGAL immigration to push their political agenda.

Cracking down on ILLEGAL ALIEN immigration has nothing to do with racism. If it did, illegal aliens from so-called "Caucasian" countries wouldn't have been deported.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.33  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.1.32    2 weeks ago

Well put and btw the words on the Statue of Liberty are a fine sentiment but they are not the immigration policy of the United States.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
7.1.34  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.33    2 weeks ago
btw the words on the Statue of Liberty are a fine sentiment but they are not the immigration policy of the United States.

It's clear that the article's author (and some others) don't know this. They also don't know that Emma Lazarus' 1883 sonnet, The New Colossus, was part of a political fundraiser to build the statue's pedestal and was unrelated to US immigration laws. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.35  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.1.34    2 weeks ago

Vic and Jasper,

We always had illegal immigration. The slang WOP was used for Italians who came over "with-out papers". My grandmother came across the Candian border without  papers and never fear deportation. Now I know some of you will say that I am not supporting border control, but I am. But I know that it much harder now to become a citizen, and that is by design, and it's wrong, and sentiment of The New Colossus, was that to invite, not dissuade. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.36  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Enoch @7.1.27    2 weeks ago

Amen Enoch.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.37  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.31    2 weeks ago

Vic,

The people who came over fought their discrimination. You should watch "Gangs of New York". It's all about that. And yes they did assimilate. So do most of our new arrivals, next generation. 

But your post goes from one topic to another... and it is hard to address properly. 

And I am sorry, but I don't see this as calling all other Americans racist. Hence why a Scottsman wrote this article. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
7.1.38  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JBB @7.1.28    2 weeks ago
"If you do not believe me, just listen to the hateful rhetoric still used by The KKK, Skin Heads, Aryan Nations, American Nazi and Republicans..."

ALL Republicans?  Not just SOME Republicans?  I'd say your comment is a little prejudiced as well.  Why didn't you mention Omar and Tlieb and BDS supporters (BDS has been declared to be antisemitic by a number of leaders) AND "Democrats"?

 
 
 
MUVA
7.1.39  MUVA  replied to  JBB @7.1.28    2 weeks ago

I don't know any kkk, skin heads or racist maybe you should find new friends.

 
 
 
MUVA
7.1.40  MUVA  replied to  JBB @7.1.26    2 weeks ago

My ancestors on my father side came here by slave ship most were killed in transit they had no choice.

 
 
 
Enoch
7.1.42  Enoch  replied to  Ender @7.1.30    2 weeks ago

Dear Friend Ender: Good points all.

Important things about which to think.

P&AB.

Enoch.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.43  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.35    one week ago
The slang WOP was used for Italians who came over "with-out papers".

The slang meant that, but it was used on ALL Italians!

My grandmother came across the Candian border without  papers and never fear deportation.

Probably because she didn't come over in a wave. I'm sure there were no newly unionized workers who felt threatened by her presence.

But I know that it much harder now to become a citizen

Citizenship should be a prized status in any society. It should never be easy nor diluted. Only Citizens should have voting rights.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.44  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.43    one week ago

Yes, Vic, the slang was used on all Italians, who were bigoted towards Italians, just like the Irish and the Jews who came through. But that is the real origin of the word. 

My grandmother came across at the beginning of the last century. I don't think that unions had anything to do with it. I know many other people who had a relative come across the northern border. 

I will not argue that Citizenship should be a prized status in any society. It should never be easy nor diluted. BUT... it has in recent years been made much harder to achieve, and that is what I am talking about. And of course, only citizens should be able to vote. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.45  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.37    one week ago
You should watch "Gangs of New York".

I don't need to watch "Gangs of New York". My ancestors were among the last off the boat. The finest people I ever knew were humiliated and made to look foolish. I have never fogotten that fact. Their way of fighting discrimination was to try and be good citizens. It wasn't until a second generation could speak the language that things began to change. There was no LBJ or militant organizations for them. 

PS:

In "Gangs of New York" one side is the "nativist" Americans - When I grew up they were whom everyone respected and some feared. Please note that today on our southern border it is the migrant who is feared by just about everyone living here. I know that dosen't pertain to the type of immigrant you are talking about, but it needs to be pointed out.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
7.1.46  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.44    one week ago

My grandmother used to say it frequently. She wasn’t bigoted towards them, she married one. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.47  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.45    one week ago
Please note that today on our southern border it is the migrant who is feared by just about everyone living here. I know that dosen't pertain to the type of immigrant you are talking about, but it needs to be pointed out.

NY has plenty of Mexicans living here. No one fears them. They are a big part of the workforce. Fear is the word they used to use on our ancestors and nativist is just another word for people who think they have more "American" than any new one. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.1.48  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Dean Moriarty @7.1.46    one week ago

That was a different time Dean. People often called each other derogatory terms. You had to look at the context in how it was said to know if they meant it as an insult. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.49  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @7.1.47    one week ago

Nice to hear it.

 
 
 
Krishna
7.1.50  Krishna  replied to  Jack_TX @7.1.5    one week ago
Well.....NBC sorta is leftist.

"Sorta"...????

One reason I am better informed than most people here is that I watch Fox News and MSNBC every day. And I can assure you that MSNBC is, overall, biased in a leftist direction. If that was your only source of news you would definitely become a very biased person-- biased in a leftist direction. (As is CNN BTW).

Ditto Fox news, except the bias is in the opposite direction.

Sure, both claim to represent various viewpoints and occasionally have people who represent differing views. But it obvious that both have the goal of leaving an overall impression that one side of the political spectrum are "the good guys" and the other side are "the bad guys".

 
 
 
Krishna
7.1.51  Krishna  replied to  JBB @7.1.28    one week ago

Many still speak of Judaism as if it were a race of men and not merely a faith. 

That's weird.

Over the years, off and on I have had friends from many backgrounds-- including Jews. The majority were not religious. In fact a few were adamant about being Atheists-- yet had a strong sense of identity as Jews.

So how can they be considered to be of any particular religion-- if they are Atheists? 

 
 
 
Steve Ott
7.1.52  Steve Ott  replied to  Dean Moriarty @7.1    one week ago

So at what point does the personal become political and the political become personal? I would suggest that you answer, if you do (and I doubt that you will), carefully. An impeachment may hang on the way you answer.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
7.1.53  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Steve Ott @7.1.52    6 days ago

I don’t understand the question. 

 
 
 
Steve Ott
7.1.54  Steve Ott  replied to  Dean Moriarty @7.1.53    6 days ago

Ok, perhaps this will help.

Indispensable Remedy: The Broad Scope of the Constitution’s Impeachment Power

"It’s no secret that academia is overwhelmingly liberal; in this case, the president’s academic defenders seem to have succumbed to the temptation Professor Black cautioned against: resolving constitutional questions “in favor of the immediate political result that is [most] palatable.” 244 As it happens, the Framers did not, explicitly or otherwise, limit impeachable offenses to abuses of official power. The historical record is quite clear: federal officers can be impeached for misconduct that doesn’t involve the powers of their office when that misconduct raises serious questions about their fitness for public trust.

The first impeachment case under the federal Constitution involved offenses committed “off the clock,” as it were. Senator William Blount’s scheme for a freebooting expedition against Spanish territory didn’t involve the abuse of any powers he held by virtue of being a senator. Yet that was no barrier to his impeachment. As one of the House managers noted, “There is not a syllable in the Constitution which confines impeachment to official acts, and . . . it is against the plain dictates of common sense, that such restraint should be imposed on it.” 245

A number of the judicial impeachment cases, including those of judges Robert W. Archbald (1912–1913) and Halsted Ritter (1936), underscore that point. 246 In Archbald’s case, the House Judiciary Committee emphatically rejected the argument that only misuse of office could be grounds for removal: “any conduct on the part of a judge which reflects on his integrity as a man or his fitness to perform the judicial functions should be sufficient to sustain his impeachment. It would be both absurd and monstrous to hold that an impeachable offense must needs be committed in an official capacity.” 247

For an official in a position of great public trust, it’s not possible to compartmentalize behavior so neatly into public and private. Indeed, by making an exception for murder and other “heinous offenses,” the signatories to the law professors’ letter give away the game by conceding that at least some private wrongs can be serious enough to merit impeachment.

As Judge Posner observes in his book on the Clinton impeachment, An Affair of State , “at some point, the personal becomes the political .” 248 Taking a cue from Professor Black, Posner sets out a series of hypotheticals where no abuse of distinctly presidential powers occurs: the president perjures himself in his best friend’s trial on child molestation charges; the president fakes a DNA test to escape responsibility in a paternity suit; the president strangles a former lover with his bare hands to prevent her from testifying before a grand jury. In such cases, Posner writes, he “would have to be impeached and convicted if he refused to resign. Americans will not be ruled by a Nero or a Caligula, however executively competent.” 249

Neither do Americans demand to be governed by moral exemplars, however. Impeachment is an extraordinary remedy, not a means for ejecting chief executives with regular, all-too-human failings. The question, as Black put it, is whether a given offense, private or public, “would so stain a president as to make his continuance in office dangerous to public order.” 25 "

I would also suggest reading the entire paper.

 
 
 
Dulay
7.2  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @7    2 weeks ago
How many people immigrate legally to the US?

How many? Your link and stats don't answer that question. 

Me thinks he was right on that one!

When he said that he meant liberal Republicans too. They still existed back then. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.2    2 weeks ago
How many? Your link and stats don't answer that question.

"More than 44.5 million immigrants resided in the United States in 2017, the historical high since census records have been kept. One in seven U.S. residents is foreign born, according to 2017 American Community Survey (ACS) data. While immigrants’ current share—13.7 percent—of the overall U.S. population (325.7 million people) has been increasing since the record low marked in 1970, it remains below the historical record of 14.8 percent hit in 1890."

And from the link:

Between 2016 and 2017, the foreign-born population increased by about 787,000, or almost 2 percent—a rate higher than the 1 percent growth experienced between 2015 and 2016, but lower than the 3 percent increase between 2013 and 2014.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
8  The Magic Eight Ball    2 weeks ago
The idea that if you're pro-immigrant, you're anti-America, and if you're anti-immigration, you are pro-America is completely wrong.
such bullshit right there...  but I'll play just for fun... lol
  • I am anti illegal immigration and pro legal immigration.
now, label me :)
 
 
 
Jack_TX
8.1  Jack_TX  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @8    2 weeks ago
I am anti illegal immigration and pro legal immigration.

That would make you "pro-immigrant and anti-criminal".

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.1.1  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jack_TX @8.1    2 weeks ago

I am pro-immigration, pro border control and for a straight forward path towards citizenship so that we don't make people who want a better life, into criminals. 

 
 
 
MUVA
8.1.2  MUVA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.1.1    2 weeks ago

What happen to paying fines and fees for illegal immigrants getting right with breaking the law has been put aside for free healthcare food stamps.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.1.3  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  MUVA @8.1.2    2 weeks ago

I don't understand your point. Please explain. 

 
 
 
MUVA
8.1.4  MUVA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.1.3    2 weeks ago

At one time just years ago the democrats and activist always said if we just give illegal aliens citizenship they would pay fines back taxes. Now they get benefits and nothing for breaking the law. You should have to pay to become a citizen I think we have enough citizens and if people want to live here they can become legal residents but not citizens.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
8.1.5  Jack_TX  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.1.1    one week ago
I am pro-immigration, pro border control and for a straight forward path towards citizenship so that we don't make people who want a better life, into criminals. 

I think the overwhelming majority of Americans hold this view.  

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
9  Dean Moriarty    2 weeks ago

I'm for open borders and against the welfare state. As the great Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman explains we can't have both open borders and a welfare state. It is one thing to immigrate to jobs and another to immigrate to welfare. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
10  It Is ME    2 weeks ago

Why do "Feel Good" authors always push this narrative, that it's ALL about "Immigration" !

That's such Crap.

The Honest Issue is "Illegal" compared to "Legal" !

Only an idiot would want "ILLEGALS" to be able to "Come" and/or "Stay" in this country, but let's make the word of the day...… "Immigrants" …… and ignore the "Unlawful Illegal" part, to sell a page or two to the "Bleeding Hearts" in this country !

 
 
 
XDm9mm
11  XDm9mm    2 weeks ago

So allow me to ask Mr. Cumming, if we are such a racist nation how then did this happen?  And these are your own words are they not?

I don't know the exact percentage, but I would say that, the day I became an American, at least 75 percent of the other people being sworn in with me were people of color.

You are aware are you not that 75 percent is a large percentage of the pool of people being sworn in as American citizens after migrating here LEGALLY.  To put it another way, 3 out of every 4 people that were sworn in with you on that day in November 2008, were in fact not white.

The American people have always welcomed immigration into this country regardless of where one came from as long as that immigration was accomplished legally.  Granted there have been times in our past when for one reason or another we shut our doors to people, but that was generally due to circumstances beyond our immediate control. What the American people of today object to is people coming here illegally.  There IS a difference as you should know as you accomplished the task legally.

Maybe you should investigate exactly how your birth citizenship home land handles immigration before you chastise America.  Here is a link for you to peruse at your convenience.  

https://www.talentscotland.com/work/working/visa-and-immigration/how-do-i-work-in-scotland-non-eea

 
 
 
Dulay
11.1  Dulay  replied to  XDm9mm @11    one week ago
So allow me to ask Mr. Cumming, if we are such a racist nation how then did this happen? 

IMHO, Mr. Cumming would answer that he didn't imply that in any way and ask you why you're making a strawman argument. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
12  Jack_TX    2 weeks ago
Things that are being said about immigration and the ideals of immigration are basically just being used as a thinly veiled form of racism. It's so blatant. The president himself actually said he doesn't mind people coming      from countries like Norway      — white people; it's the people from "   shithole countries  " he doesn't want.

Sorry...but it needs to be said here that Haiti is...in actual fact....a "shithole".   That's not racist.  Raw sewage runs in the streets.  It's not Wakanda, FFS.

Ask any offended entitled white kid if they've been to Haiti.  Many of them will say "yes". 

Ask them why they were there.  Every one of them will answer "I was on a mission trip doing relief work".  

It's a shithole.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
12.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Jack_TX @12    2 weeks ago
It's a shithole.

You're being kind and generous.   But, it is only one of many.  Quite a few of which are considered advanced.  Thailand, India, Pakistan, to name a few.  

 
 
 
bugsy
12.2  bugsy  replied to  Jack_TX @12    one week ago
It's a shithole.

I agree. In the early 90s, my ship went there for community outreach and did some work on schools and other places. While we were on a bus to get to our destination, we were held up for a little while because there was a body lying in the street and they did not want us to see it.

Funny thing is, my wife is from the Philippines, and I have been there many times. For the most part, it is a shithole. Difference is most of the people there do the best they can for what they have and don't depend on anyone for help.

Plus...it's a fun shithole.

 
 
 
charger 383
13  charger 383    2 weeks ago

Overpopulation is the problem, there are more people here than can be sustained 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
13.1  XDm9mm  replied to  charger 383 @13    2 weeks ago
there are more people here than can be sustained 

When people start fighting over the finite resources available, that problem will be addressed, viciously and bloody, but it will be addressed.

 
 
 
bbl-1
13.2  bbl-1  replied to  charger 383 @13    2 weeks ago

Yes.  Thanks to automation, wealth concentration and the anti-Choicers.

 
 
 
Tacos!
14  Tacos!    2 weeks ago

This article is a bit of a mess. It's really oddly structured. He repeatedly contradicts or undercuts himself. His overarching theme seems to be that there is opposition to immigration that is rooted in racism, but in the first paragraph, he writes, (all bolding is mine)

We sound very self-hating about the very notion of immigration, but we're actually just confusing racism with a desire to fix the immigration system.

I'm not sure what he wanted to say here, but I agree with what he actually wrote. Many people who are trying to fix the immigration system are accused of being racist for it. 

I also feel like he's projecting:

Any dissent against the president or any disagreement with his views is seen as a red flag and people immediately respond in an aggressive way.

Was this written in 2011? Because for 8 years, I saw many who disagreed with President Obama being labeled a racist.

Or maybe it was written in January 2017: 

People are just screaming at one another right now; it makes it very difficult to engage.

Yeah, that sounds about right.

I particularly enjoyed this transition:

I'm trying to get people to also stand back and try to not let the tropes of this awful rhetoric blind us to what is actually going on. This government is trying to brainwash its citizens . . . 

And just to show it's never too late for an off-topic tangent in your writing,

 . . . with people like Betsy DeVos running the Education Department . . .

Uh. Whut?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
14.1  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Tacos! @14    2 weeks ago

Tacos,

You might have made some good points there, but then you went off on your own tangent with your video. Ironic, no?

 
 
 
Tacos!
14.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @14.1    2 weeks ago

The video is to show a person screaming, which is something in the article I was responding to.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
14.1.2  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Tacos! @14.1.1    2 weeks ago

The article isn't about Trump, but policy, so no.

 
 
 
Tacos!
14.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @14.1.2    one week ago

I don't understand why it's bothering you. The article isn't just about policy. It's also about the emotion in today's politics. The line I was responding to was this:

People are just screaming at one another right now; it makes it very difficult to engage.

Hence, a political screaming video. Did it really disrupt things so much? I feel like we're arguing way more about one little part of my post than is necessary.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
14.1.4  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Tacos! @14.1.3    one week ago

Because this is not about Trump's election and that is NOT what this article is about. It is a diversion. Furthermore, it is a diversion to annoy a specific group of people. 

But please.... go on and have the last word.

 
 
 
Tacos!
14.1.5  Tacos!  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @14.1.4    one week ago
Because this is not about Trump's election and that is NOT what this article is about. It is a diversion. Furthermore, it is a diversion to annoy a specific group of people. 

You're the only one here talking about Trump. I was just going for the scream thing and it was a small part of my original post. I've said that more than once now. I wasn't doing it to divert or annoy anyone. If it had that effect on you (which it clearly did) that's about you, not me. I just thought it was funny.

Meanwhile, you haven't had anything to say about the whole rest of my comment, which I guess you decided to dismiss because of my allegedly offensive video link. 

I don't even remember what this seed was about now. There's clearly too much angst going on to actually discuss anything anyway.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
14.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @14.1.5    one week ago

If you are not a true blue Trump supporter, why would you post a video of one of his election opponent's supporters screaming? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
14.1.7  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @14.1.6    one week ago

This has been explained at least twice now, John. Do you read the thread before posting? The article mentions people screaming in the context of political disagreements. The video shows someone who doesn't agree that Trump should have been elected, and the reaction was literally just scream at the sky. It has nothing to do with Trump specifically, or with me supporting anyone in particular.

Why don't you skip it if it bothers you and focus on something else in the comment?

 
 
 
Texan1211
14.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @14.1.6    one week ago
If you are not a true blue Trump supporter, why would you post a video of one of his election opponent's supporters screaming? 

1. Shows the maturity level of anti-Trumpers.

2. It is freaking hilarious to sane adults.

3. It is freaking hilarious to sane adults.

4.It is freaking hilarious to sane adults

 
 
 
bbl-1
15  bbl-1    2 weeks ago

An excellent seed, Perrie.  Well done. 

And as usual, some of the comments completely miss the point.

 
 
 
Steve Ott
16  Steve Ott    2 weeks ago

For those of you who disagree with the article:

Which came first, nation-state or humans?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
17  Nerm_L    one week ago

The proponents of lax immigration laws have established racism by using racial terms to describe immigrants.  Hasn't the real purpose of using racial terms to describe immigrants only been an expedient way to label political opponents as racist? 

Proponents of lax immigration laws point to the country's history of European immigration.  Why not describe that history using racial terms; why not describe that as a history of white immigration?

Describing today's immigration using terminology as for history, we have a problem with Central and South American immigration and Middle Eastern immigration.  But that's isn't what is happening.  The political expediency is to describe today's immigrants as Hispanic, Muslim, or brown so that political opposition can be labeled racist.

Alan Cumming (the author of the seeded opinion) is utilizing a cheap, dirty, political trick to make an intellectual argument that is dishonest.  If immigration is all about race, as Alan Cumming suggests, then the United States has a long and rich history of white, Christian immigration.  Anyone criticizing and disparaging that history must also be racist.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
17.1  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Nerm_L @17    one week ago

No matter how eloquently you express the truth as you did just now they won’t listen, it gets them too much mileage for their ... well you know what I’m referencing.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
17.2  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Nerm_L @17    one week ago
Alan Cumming (the author of the seeded opinion) is utilizing a cheap, dirty, political trick to make an intellectual argument that is dishonest.  If immigration is all about race, as Alan Cumming suggests, then the United States has a long and rich history of white, Christian immigration.  Anyone criticizing and disparaging that history must also be racist.

No Nerm, the were not racists, since that has to do with race. They were bigots and as such they were labeled "Know Nothings". 

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/immigrants-conspiracies-and-secret-society-launched-american-nativism-180961915/

So whether you call it racism or bigotry, it is what it is and what we can easily call it is hate. Cummings is not wrong. He is just using the lingo of the day.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
17.2.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @17.2    one week ago
So whether you call it racism or bigotry, it is what it is and what we can easily call it is hate. Cummings is not wrong. He is just using the lingo of the day.

What the Smithsonian article shows is that using the label of 'bigot' has a long political history in the United States.  It was just as politically expedient to label the 'native' populations as bigots in the 1840-50s as it is today.  That history also tells us how the story ends.  We know how the influx of immigrants affected the indigenous population.  The political expediency of a phony liberalism really did play a significant role in the 'genocide' of the American Indian.  The migration of immigrants doesn't stop at the border.

The Know Nothing politics arose where the influx of immigrants was greatest; New York, Boston, and Philadelphia.  That should not be too surprising.  Rapid increases in population creates problems that strains the ability of civil government to provide services.  Immigrants do not bring a government with them, they are simply dumped onto established civil government who is expected to cope with the flood.  New York allowed slums to grow as a means of coping with the influx of immigrants which tarnished the American Dream those immigrants were seeking.  Overwhelming the country's ability to absorb immigrants really can turn hope to hopelessness; we've seen this play out before.   Labeling a native population 'bigots' because they cannot cope with the influx of immigrants is much like labeling those unable to cope with a natural disaster as 'lazy'.  It's nothing more than cheap, dirty politics used to make intellectual arguments that are dishonest.

Alan Cummings is utilizing the same cheap, dirty, dishonest politics as it was used in the 1840-50s.  The history of political expediency is repeating itself.  Social politics has not progressed very far over the last 180 years; Democrats are still Democrats.

 
 
 
jungkonservativ111
18  jungkonservativ111    one week ago

This author clearly has no clue of American immigrant history. There has ALWAYS been a lack of trust and hatred for new immigrants coming into this country. We have always been a country of immigrants. First off, we have always closely watched where we allowed immigrants to come from. It has never been a free for all for all the poor people of the world. We started out only taking people from compatible cultures which was the right way to do it. Second, those people where mostly white, and they still felt the same sentiment as these poor brown people. Germans, Irish, and Italians have all experienced the same prejudices. "Irish need not apply" was not uncommon to see. Liberals seem to think it's worse when brown people have to suffer because that's the way they have been raised. White guilt sentiments that make them feel like any distrust or negative feelings towards anyone not white is simply inherent racism instead of human nature that people of all color feel towards strangers. Sorry you are going to have to try harder to race  shame this white boy.

 
 
 
freepress
19  freepress    one week ago

I am surprised the right wing nuts that are so anti-immigrant don't go after Trump's wife and her own immigration problems or her chain migration for her family. Wonder why they don't go after Ancestry.com or other ancestry websites. The Americas were an Indian aboriginal continent before colonization, so absolutely no one with white skin in any of the Americas from the top of Canada to the tip of South America are native. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
19.1  Texan1211  replied to  freepress @19    one week ago
I am surprised the right wing nuts that are so anti-immigrant don't go after Trump's wife and her own immigration problems or her chain migration for her family. Wonder why they don't go after Ancestry.com or other ancestry websites. The Americas were an Indian aboriginal continent before colonization, so absolutely no one with white skin in any of the Americas from the top of Canada to the tip of South America are native. 

Not shocking that you are surprised. That tends to happen to folks who deliberately misunderstand others' positions.

Most folks aren't anti-immigrant. That is just left-wing babble. Most folks want immigration laws enforced and are happy to welcome new, legal immigrants.

Which peoples were here first or second or 33rd doesn;t matter.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Texan1211
Dismayed Patriot
MUVA
Sunshine
JohnRussell
Nerm_L
jungkonservativ111
Old Hermit
Krishna


29 visitors