Cultural Reasons to Stop Illegal Immigration

Kunk Fu Zoby Kung Fu Zu8/14/13
Now we must ask “where do the illegal aliens come from?” While this is impossible to answer with complete certainty, it is interesting to note that according to one Arizona publication, “most (91%) deported illegal aliens come from 4 countries: Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Other countries which had over 1,000 deportees included Brazil, the Dominican Republic, Colombia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, China and Peru, i.e. five out of seven are Spanish-speaking and another Portuguese. The Heritage Foundation estimates similar numbers, putting the portion of illegal aliens from Mexico, the Caribbean, and Latin American at 84%.

Why is this important? In the largest sense, it is a question of assimilation. How can it be advantageous for the U.S.A. to allow the illegal immigration of millions of people from one general geographic and cultural area, almost all of whom speak the same foreign language? Apologists for illegal immigration say we had similar influxes of non-English speakers in the past and that these people assimilated within a generation or two of their arrival. To those people, I would like to point out that those immigrants came from many different countries and when they arrived here, they were very far from their home countries. For various reasons, they had to assimilate to be successful. This is not the case with many of today’s illegal immigrants.

The U.S.A. and Mexico have a contiguous border of almost 2,000 miles, which is not exactly sealed. It is estimated that something like 500,000 new illegal immigrants enter the U.S.A. each year. Add this to the already huge number of Spanish speakers already here illegally or otherwise, and you have a growing percentage of the population which does not speak English with an ever decreasing need to learn it. There are areas in many U.S. cities where Spanish is already the lingua franca. If you do not believe Spanish is becoming one of the two de facto languages of the U.S.A., simply make a telephone call to your bank, credit card provider, an airline, or any number of other businesses and you will be asked if you wish the call to be in English or Spanish.

I have nothing against speaking several languages. I am fluent in one foreign language and can get by in a couple of others, if necessary. But I have a big problem with the Balkanization of the U.S.A. and that is exactly what is happening. We are effectively dividing the country into different linguistic areas, which can only harm the country. Without going into great detail, I ask my readers to consider the word Balkanization. It refers to the Balkans, an area which is populated by different ethnic groups with different languages and cultures. The region has been troubled for centuries and the problems have arisen out of different nationalities, languages and cultures.

Other countries also have problems due to diversity of language and culture. Here are a few examples:

Canada: where the French speaking Quebecois have tried for years to secede from the rest of the English speaking country. They appear to be quiescent, but could come alive again.

Belgium: which went over a year without a national government and was on the brink of dissolution due to the deep seated differences between the Dutch speaking Flems and French speaking Walloons.

Spain: where the Basque terrorist group ETA carried out a violent campaign seeking complete autonomy. There are also major disagreements between the Castilians and Catalans.

The former Czechoslovakia didn’t last three years after the fall of communism. The country split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia even though the languages of each are much closer than English and Spanish.

Since the end of Empire, much of Africa has been at war. To a large extent, these wars have been between different tribes fighting for supremacy in various countries. The reason these intra-country struggles could take place is because the Colonial powers drew up national boundaries based on European political interests, not on local linguistic and tribal reality.

I could go on, but I believe the point is clear. If the U.S.A. is to remain strong, it must maintain a dominant linguistic and cultural tradition.

This does not mean we need to stop immigration, although it might be a good idea to reduce it for a few years in order to help speed assimilation by those who have come here legally.

We need to have a serious look at our present immigration policy as regards the national origins of future immigrants, and the type of individual immigrant we are seeking. In my opinion, we need to be careful about allowing an over-preponderance of people from one linguistic and cultural area. On the individual basis, we should try to attract those who can contribute the most to our country without having to rely on our welfare system for support. • (1555 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Cultural Reasons to Stop Illegal Immigration

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Very fine article, Mr. Kung. I am impressed. This is every bit as good as anything I read at NRO, perhaps better.

    It was a bear (no built-in function), but I was able to indent that one block of text. Believe it or not, it took some custom coding. So let me know if you think that looks good for a first-level indent, both left and right. It is easy to adjust (now that it is coded in). And once adjusted, that will be the standard.

    • Kung Fu Zu says:

      Brad, thanks for the kind words. The indents look very good to me. I am sorry to cause so much trouble, but I am completely at a loss when it comes to such things.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        No prob, Mr. Kung. Typography has been a specialty of mine for over 30 years. I’m used to sweating the details. 🙂

  2. Kurt NY says:

    Another issue leading to the fracturing on monolinguilism is modern communications. In the past, when someone left their homeland to come here, it was pretty difficult, expensive, and time consuming to return there, so they all eventually made their home here (although some studies say a significant portion ultimately returned to whence they came). Now, someone coming here is a phone call away from home and can return there comparatively cheaply and easily. Furthermore, they have access to much of the same cultural institutions here such as Spanish language media, TV, etc. It is thus far easier for them to maintain cultural ties with the country of their birth, delaying making stronger connection with this nation.

    I think it was Samuel Huntington who said a nation is a society whose members communicate more intensely with each other than with outsiders. I too do not think having a second language is a bad thing, but if possession and usage of that with its enduring cultural baggage leads to some to communicate more intensely with their co-language speakers so as to fail to assimilate fully, we are buying nothing but trouble, for both them and us.

    • Kung Fu Zu says:

      I wanted to keep my piece short enough to hold people’s attention therefore appreciate you pointing this out. I hope others will think about all the implications of other things including technology and multiculturalism regarding our national sovereignty and culture, which are connected in my opinion.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    When your friends are your enemies.

    Okay, so at least this person has written an article critical of “sanctuary cities.” By why in the world use the phrase “undocumented immigrant” as she does instead of “illegal aliens”? Goodness gracious.

    And a commentor said in reply to this:

    He is an illegal alien, not an “undocumented immigrant.” What next, undocumented drivers, undocumented voters, undocumented attorneys and doctors?

    How about using plain English instead of the PC talk. It is not a “Sanctuary” city or state, it is a lawless city or state.

    Simple. Clear. Why all the fuzzy thinking? Debra Saunders also wrote:

    To me, racking up misdemeanors should make an immigrant who is here illegally a suitable subject for deportation — but the law has evolved.

    Brubaker5 astutely noted:

    To me, being here illegally should make an immigrant suitable for deportation. The notion that a person can be here “a little bit illegally” is as preposterous as being a little bit pregnant.

    Yep.

    How can we solve the problem of people coming over the border illegally if we use euphemisms such as “undocumented immigrant”? The very problem with illegal immigration is that these law-breakers have been re-defined as victims, the clear law-breaking swept under the carpet for various disingenuous reasons. And someone who has already committed a felony by entering the country illegally is not adding substantially to their rap sheets with a few misdemeanors. Crossing the border illegally is all it should take to be required to be deported.

    God save us from those who would try to solve the problems that plague us.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      Political correct speech has softened the brains of far too many people. It is not possible to solve a problem unless one can articulate what the problem is.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      One thing to note is that it takes resources to deport illegal aliens, so those should be prioritized. Felons first, misdemeanors second, then those only guilty of being here illegally (though I suspect most of those would actually turn out to have done something else as well).

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        No doubt the costs to deport these people will be substantial, but there are a few other things which could be done that could reduce costs quite a bit.

        1. Make E-Verify mandatory for hiring
        2. Make it a criminal offense to hire knowingly hire illegals
        3. Arrest the CEO of a large company hiring illegals and frog-march him out the front door of his office. Continue operation with CEO’s nos. 2, 3 and 4 until it sinks in.
        4. Cut off all social services to illegals.
        5. Prosecute officials of “sanctuary cities” for not following the law

        The mantra that politicians use, “our immigration system is broken so we need to pass new laws to fix it” is a lie. There is no political or economic will within the elites to enforce laws on the books. If these laws were enforced much of the problem would disappear.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          It may have been impolitic of Mitt Romney for suggesting that a good immigration policy would lead to illegal aliens self-deporting, but that’s still the ideal result. First close the spigot (which includes the various inducement-eliminations you suggest), then we can decide what to do about those who remain.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          I think the reality is that the horses have bolted and there’s no closing the barn door. What this means is a true “fundamental transformation” of America. It will become more like the third world. That’s nothing against the quality of the illegal aliens. But there is not now, nor will there be later, any incentive to assimilate them. Instead, America will draw back to the methods of a third world country. And because their presence is either all about cheap labor or a permanent Democrat Party majority (while sticking it to white people), no one really cares about the long-term (or short-term) effect on the country. In fact, as far as the Left is concerned, any ill effects we more than having coming.

          But your typical second-tier useful idiot will still get the warm-fuzzies from teaching himself or his kids Spanish as he espouses the virtues of multiculturalism. You’ll see more and more people doing the Jeb Bush Hispanophile thing. And the illegal aliens will look at us and laugh. Why shouldn’t they? We are ridiculous.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            Ann Coulter points out many of the detrimental aspects of third-world (especially Latin American) cultures in her latest book. Child rape is much more common there (including girls bearing children before they’re 10), as well as trashing public places (which is one reason they fit in well with liberals, I guess). Eventually, people will see what happens to the environment (so precious to so many liberals, or so they say) when the US becomes Mexico El Norte.

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              It’s impossible for those two see the superiority of Western Culture if they’re already convinced that third-world ways are extremely charming.

              • Timothy Lane says:

                Well, they won’t like child rapes, female genital mutilation, massive littering, and other third-world cultural delights. It’s a lot easier to see those cultures as charming at a distance or as an occasional visitor. Living in them is another matter. Of course, the Left does its best to hide where all these changes come from.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            Que?

  4. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Tim said:

    Well, they won’t like child rapes, female genital mutilation, massive littering, and other third-world cultural delights.

    They probably wouldn’t like those things. But they could certainly explain them away as the result of oppression.

    So let me state StubbornThing‘s official position on immigration. You can sign off on it or not. Or amend it. Here goes. I would call it a “White Paper” but refrain from doing so because it might be perceived as racist…maybe even in instance of micro-aggression (I always aim for macro, but sometimes I fall short).

    The Official StubbornThings Position on Illegal Immigration

    Because no one wants to send back the millions of illegal immigrants, it is a fait accompli and the borders will likely stay porous until California votes in a Señor Moonbeam as governor (or more likely a Señorita Moonbeam — or perhaps some mix of gender or body parts which as yet has no name either in Spanish or English). Because there’s nothing we can do about it, it will be a case of smiles, everyone, smiles as tin roof shanty towns are re-classified as liberal chic.

    We’ll get used to pretending that abnormal is normal, although conservatives will have a complex system of secret handshakes and other signs in order to keep each other sane.

    But luckily because of the influx of illegal aliens, we will have an opportunity to pass an amendment to the Constitution. It will allow each citizen to decide which Federal law he or she (or it or whatever) are not required to obey. Many will choose the income tax law, but for others it could be OSHA standards. But each will be allowed to pick and choose, the choice being active for a two-year term where at such time a different choice can be made.

    This will get a little complicated for arresting officers. But thanks to computers and the vast NSA depository of information on us all, I think they can cope readily enough. If UPS can track a gazillion packages all being sent from one private party to another, then law enforcement can certainly determine readily enough if you are exempt from a particular law. “I’m sorry, Mr. Nelson, I just checked and you are indeed cleared to launch ICMB’s out of your back yard. Have a nice day.”

    Lest you think I’m joking, this is the natural outcome when the very laws that protect the integrity of our country are deemed expendable. So fair is fair. All we want is equal un-rights.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Well, we can hope it doesn’t work out that way. (As Clarence Darrow said to Judge Raulston at a key moment in the Scopes trial, “Well, Your Honor has the right to hope.”) Liberals will certainly react as you suggest to the undesirable aspects of third-world cultures. Normal people won’t, though liberals will do their best to keep them ignorant on the reason we have such things.

      Legend has it that a few years ago, a conservative student at an Ivy League college noticed bins marked “white paper” and “colored paper”. He changed the latter label to the more politically correct “paper of color”. The administration was Not Pleased.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Reportedly he’s going to issue an executive order getting rid of the 2014 Obama amnesty orders tomorrow. Given how large a mess the Crimson King left, it would be nice if Trump did more than 2 or 3 executive orders per day. He’ll still be draining that particular swamp when the mid-terms are held.

        Somehow I seem to have put my reply on the wrong posting. Needless to say, I was responding to the exchange immediately below.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          If someone want to take a serious stab at being a journalist (and this requires time, skill, and some attention to detail), they may author a sort of “What Has Trump Done Now” column…maybe set up a special blog. If one wanted to do this, they would have to hold to journalistic standards. I want good news, bad news, and indifferent news…and no kool-aid. He’s going to be a dynamo and I just don’t have time to keep up with it all but it would be nice to have some kind of scorecard.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            By journalistic standards, are you referring to how journalists actually behave today, or how they claim they behave today?

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              Well, I wouldn’t mind someone taking on the task of following what Trump is doing. And, yes, I mean my the journalistic standards of objective reporting…which perhaps never really did exist much, but it is the standard for which to shoot.

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          Reportedly he’s going to issue an executive order getting rid of the 2014 Obama amnesty orders tomorrow

          I hope you are correct. I can understand Trump stretching out his executive orders for PR reasons. He can keep the public’s attention riveted for some weeks if he keeps going like this.

  5. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Trump getting gold stars from the NRO Editors on his first moves to deal with illegal aliens. Go Trump!

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      I don’t recall NRO being such immigration hawks. So I will maintain a healthy skepticism as regards what they write. For example, Trump has yet to do anything to revoke DACA i.e. the Dreamer order which Obama signed that gave a two year amnesty to illegals who were brought here as children. Those who registered would get a social security number and the right to stay in the country.

      All Trump would have to do to stop this nonsense is send a memo to Homeland Security ordering a stop to this program. Regardless what one thinks about allowing illegal aliens who came here as children, DACA was a gross breach of our legal system with Obama legislating from his desk. For that reason alone, DACA must be abolished.

      Come on President Trump.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Now now. Let’s give credit where credit is due. Rome wasn’t built (or dismantled) in a day. It’s a start. And I wonder if Ted Cruz would have done any of this.

        And, by the way, is it just me or has Victor Davis Hanson become unreadable? It’s just puff piece after puff piece.

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          I don’t want to downplay what Trump has done so far. Frankly, I am surprised and pleased with the executive orders he has signed, as well as the overall messages he is sending out.

          I am hoping Trump’s actions will make me eat my past words regarding him. We will then get into another discussion about condiments and sauces.

          • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

            Here’s to word-eating indeed…perhaps with red sauce.

            And I stress again for anyone in general, if you’re looking to move beyond just bitching and complaining and offering a laundry list of grievances, I really would love someone to be our Trump Intern and write a regular column or blog about the progress, setbacks, perceptions, realities, illusions, etc., in the Trumpverse. Such a column’s purpose would not be to bash Trump or praise Trump but just to keep track. He’s going to certainly be a unique president. Would anyone have really been very interested in what a President Jeb Bush was doing?

            I don’t expect any takers but I’m always looking to try to fulfill the purpose of this site which is to move beyond the bland daily drama and to talk real, to talk funny (this should, after all, not always be so damn serious), to be a little creative, and to have a sense of proportion.

            • Timothy Lane says:

              I don’t see doing this as a separate blog, but I can report interesting news about Trump that I see at Town Hall, Hot Air, and Daily Caller..

  6. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Australia appears to be regaining sanity in its citizenship laws.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-immigration-idUSKBN17M07Q?il=0

    The USA would do well to copy the English proficiency test. I have seen people become citizens who spoke, virtually, no English. And this after living a minimum of five years in the States. How is that possible?

    • Timothy Lane says:

      I believe that naturalization does require some degree of proficiency in English. But this only matters if the requirement is actually enforced by the bureaucracy. It also requires knowledge of civics — more than Americans are required to know, though increasing numbers of states are requiring such knowledge to graduate from high school.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        During my wife’s naturalization ceremony, we stood next to a Chinese woman who could not even read the swearing-in statement which is required before becoming a citizen. For the life of me, I could not understand how she got there. But she got her certificate of citizenship.

        I know of a man whose English was rudimentary, at best, who also became a citizen.

        As to the civics test, it was based on a list of 100 questions which every applicant got. Each applicant was asked 10 of these questions at random. I forget how many correct answers an applicant had to have, but it certainly wasn’t a minimum 9 out of 10.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Nothing against Asians (in fact, I’d take them in place of Muslims), I believe the unstated goal of immigration policy is to water-down the white, Christian majority.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            I suspect your are correct. I do believe that was Teddy Kennedy’s intention when he pushed through the change in immigration law in the mid-1960’s.

            I have been to two naturalization ceremonies. In both, the number of white people was about 1%. That may have to do with the fact that the majority of countries which consist of majority white populations are prosperous and have very generous social programs so there is little economic reason to leave if one is not overly ambitious. On the other hand, most of the third world sucks.

            • Timothy Lane says:

              I don’t know if Teddy Bear realized what he was doing, though one certainly can’t rule it out. But at some point, at least a few decades ago, I think the Demagogues realized that they needed to create a new electorate in order to win reliably.

  7. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    I believe this article shows just how out of touch the New York Times is on the subject of illegal immigration. Do they think that they are going to arouse a lot of sympathy?

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/world/americas/honduras-migration-border-wall.html

    Government corruption would seem to be a large reason for people leaving Central America. It is a sad situation, but the USA cannot be responsible for taking all the people who wish to come here from corrupt countries.

    I noted that the people in the story who cancelled their smuggling into the USA were going to pay US$8,000 and US$12,000 respectively. That is something I have noted about many illegals. They are not the poorest, rather they are people who have some resources, but want to make more money in the USA.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      The idea of the fear of breaking the law being a deterrent. What will they think of next?

      I hope you and the family have a wonderful Independence Day, Mr. Kung. America is changing. We’re becoming a country full of screwballs and weenies. Read Williamson’s A People Without a King. As I mentioned in the comments section, it’s a high sight better than the usual America-bashing article by Conrad Black.

      I was reading Drudge this morning and followed a link about Apple’s new headquarters being built in Cupertino. In the article was embedded a video of Steve Jobs (apparently just a few months before his death) pitching the new building to the Cupertino city council.

      Look at the city council. What a pathetic bunch. One of the affirmative action members there (an Asian) had this as her question for Jobs: Can you give us free wifi? (It’s about the 13:15 mark of the video.)

      Job’s answer was great. He said something like, “I’m kind of old-fashioned. I believe that with the tax money we give you it’s you who should provide us with something.” Another pathetic council member begged Steve for an Apple Store.

      Imagine that. You have a chance to ask Steve Jobs a question and all you have in you is a desire to get free stuff. This group of weenies on the council is what America is becoming. I just found the video so instructive. Government is infested with weenies.

      And these weenies have gotten it into their blood that all people have a right to live in America because, gosh, it just wouldn’t be fair to be “exclusive” to live better than others. And note that typically these weenies with this twisted ethic live in gate communities or are otherwise very well off themselves.

      The weenie ethic is replacing the Yankee work ethic. Until men reclaim their space in the public square as men, none of this can change.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        Thanks Brad, and I hope you have a good 4th. Better enjoy it while you can. I saw somewhere that only abou 52-53% of Americans are proud of our country with about 45% not being proud of it. If this weren’t so dangerous, it would be a joke. But you’ve got to hand it to the left, they have marched through the institutions and control education and the media.

        One of the affirmative action members there (an Asian) had this as her question for Jobs: Can you give us free wifi? (It’s about the 13:15 mark of the video.)

        Thank God there are still some Asian immigrants who come here for the right reasons and appreciate the chance to work and be free. Most Asians understand life ain’t fair and, in Asia at least, get on with it.

        One wonders whether Asian councilwoman is a brain-dead leftist or is she just a cynic trying to get something for nothing?

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          I saw somewhere that only abou 52-53% of Americans are proud of our country with about 45% not being proud of it.

          Ask me every five minutes or so whether or not I am proud of it. Of the past, yes. Of the present, lukewarm.

          Let’s just say the Declaration of Independence survives in many hearts. But the 4th of July is just that for most: a date. A day in which you eat a lot and blow off fireworks. (And I certainly did eat a lot. Someone who lives on the beach brought in some fresh oysters that we BBQ’d. Oysters are an acquired taste. I have acquire it. They were delicious.)

          At the picnic I was at today/tonight, I heard not one word spoken of America, her ideals, her history, or what this day means. Yes, I realize I need to finagle an invitation to the Tarzwell bash to get that. But it is what it is right now.

          The mind, heart, and soul of this nation are shattered. Or let’s just say these things are shallow. I realize I haven’t written a whole lot (or anything) about Independence Day. But that fact is few want to hear it and also I’m as subject as anyone to the wear and tear of the drip, drip, drip of this Leftist acid that has poisoned everything. You just lose heart.

  8. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Ann Coulter has a good article on parsing the GOP losses in Virginia: Yes, Virginia, Immigration Is Turning The Country Blue

    I like this part in particular:

    The only reason Democrats want a never-ending stream of Third World immigrants is because they know immigrants will help them win elections, allowing The New York Times to write self-congratulatory editorials like this one last week: “Virginia Rejects Your Hateful Politics, Mr. Trump.”

    Well, technically, millions of Third-Worlders living in Virginia rejected Trump’s “hateful politics.” But guess what? They also rejected John McCain’s pusillanimous politics and Mitt Romney’s soft-spoken politics.

    They were brought in to vote for the Democrats. That’s the real job immigrants are doing that Americans just won’t do.

    A good accompaniment to this is Paul Gottfried’s Jonah’s Off Target Again. I have to admit I agree with every single word of it.

    One way to understand Goldberg and the Establishment GOP is that they are what I would call Decorum Republicans. They are more interested in appearances, particularly of themselves being politic, respectful, articulate, and untarnished by opposing people in material ways. (And once you really do oppose people, you will be called many nasty things, and Decorum Republicans have only their sense of decorum to hold onto.)

    I know these kinds of people in real life, and Trump is their worst nightmare. And it’s not because of his ideas. It’s that he’s as far from GOP Decorum Politics as you can get. Yes, there’s already the term “Country Club Republicans.” And it is valid for the same reasons.

    But I think we should fully understand the moral and political relativism of these Decorum Republicans, for much of what is considered prim and proper is in regards what makes the Left angry.

    And you’re hearing this from someone who has not had his nose up Trump’s butt since day one. Trump has his rough spots. And there’s something to be said for decorum, but only as a tool for persuasion in one’s entire arsenal of “the carrot and the stick.” For Decorum Republicans, there is never a stick therefore they are forever feckless in regards to doing anything other than winning office. And to do so they must for a time pretend they are something they are not, thus the term “RINO.”

    • Timothy Lane says:

      These Decorum Republicans are what I would call Country Club Republicans. Their big motivation is to work together with everyone, even if they don’t need to. And they certainly want to get along with everyone, even the smear merchants of the Demagogues — except the harsher sorts on their own side

  9. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    we should fully understand the moral and political relativism of these Decorum Republicans, for much of what is considered prim and proper is in regards what makes the Left angry.

    Since the left couldn’t care less about “decorum” and it is conservatives who are generally more interested in polite behavior, I suspect these types use “Decorum” in order to defame and halt politicians and political movement of the right. It is a type of censorship.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *