If you’re looking for racism in the immigration debate, look to the Democrats who are projecting against Trump’s race-free words their own vile race hatred.
Donald Trump disputes that he used the word “shithole” when referring to countries the citizens of which do not confer a benefit on America when they immigrate here. He did, however, acknowledge that he used strong language to say that America does not have an obligation to take in immigrants that harm her. Outside of Blue enclaves, in which residents live behind high walls with alarm systems and security guards, ordinary Americans knew precisely what he meant — and were grateful to him for saying so.
As with all other debates (abortion, war, unions, etc.), Democrats are stuck firmly in a pre-modern past. In their mind, immigration is perpetually about the era from 1860 through 1910. Back then, in a pre-technological age, with a population half what it is now, America needed bodies and lots of them. We needed factory workers and street sweepers and house cleaners and tunnel diggers and bridge builders and horse drivers and, during the early 1860s, bodies to be thrown into the Civil War.
Nowadays, America’s needs are different. While there will always be a place for physical labor, the reality is that technology is (a) doing away with brute force labor, whether in farms, factories, or fast food and (b) making literacy a necessity for most aspects of American life.
Moreover, modern America has limited (to no) tolerance for people who can’t use toilets; who murder women for “dishonoring” the family; who murder gays just for being; who espouse murdering Jews as a central tenet of their faith; who murder and dismember albinos for good luck charms; who mutilate little girls by cutting off their external genitalia; who support general slavery or sexual slavery; and who have a disproportionate predilection for rape and pedophilia.
Does this mean that every person from those cultures holding those values is going to commit acts that are anathema in America?* Of course not! But if you’re calculating the odds that one person will be more simpatico to American culture than another, countries of origin matter. Some share our values or at least are not opposed to our values. East Asian immigrants have very different cultural practices from those in America, but their work ethic is in sync with the American work ethic and their cultural practices enrich, rather than attack, the American way of life.
It’s worth noting here that it’s not just countries mired in violence and corruption that give birth to values we don’t want in America. If I had a say in the matter, I’d also argue that, as a Constitutional country, we should have less tolerance for people from socialist countries who, having destroyed freedom on their shores, seek to import their socialism to ours. As far as I’m concerned, we should shut the door on Sweden and large chunks of Western Europe. Meanwhile, Poles and Hungarians are proving pretty damn stalwart.
I’m also hostile to people who advocate legitimately insane positions, such as, for example, those at Google who claim that they are simultaneously animals, people, and buildings. In their own way, these people are just as destructive as the rapists and murderers. And perhaps it’s not a coincidence that some of the loudest SJWs at Google seem to have come from outside of America. . . .
As a general principle, I do not believe that America, despite her immigrant-friendly history, is obligated to take in immigrants at all. We take them because they benefit us, not because there’s some rule forcing us to do so.
In this view, I differ from James Comey, a man whose endless moral condescension is especially irritating given the fact that he deliberately acted to protect Hillary Clinton from her grossly illegal conduct and then violated America’s national security laws himself by handing out classified information in order to bring down a duly elected president. I don’t know about you, but I hate seeing criminals place themselves on a pedestal to lecture me.
Anyway, Comey likes to think he’s smarter than the next person, so his response to Trump’s allegedly crude reference to countries whose citizens do not benefit America was to . . . quote the Emma Lazarus poem on the base of the Statue of Liberty. For a lawyer to think a bit of doggerel is the equivalent of either law or public policy is disturbing, to say the least.
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” This country’s greatness and true genius lies in its diversity.
— James Comey (@Comey) January 12, 2018
Yes, because we always base our national policy on doggerel verse.
— Bookwormroom (@Bookwormroom) January 13, 2018
The Constitution, as others before me, have said, is not a suicide pact — and it’s especially not a suicide pact mandating unlimited immigration in order to keep Democrat voters flowing to the polls.
All of the above, of course, are substantive points. The problem for American discourse is that Democrats, like all narcissists, don’t traffic in substantive points. They are cornered rats who resort to vicious attacks meant to draw blood. And what better “bloody” word today than “racist”? So, rather than counter with facts and logic those who wish to shape American immigration so that it benefits America be welcoming in people from all corners who embrace our values, Democrats are screaming “racism!” Trump, they insist, despite a long history serving immigrant communities — and despite color-blind policies that have hugely benefited black and Hispanic people — in fact hates black people and Hispanics.
The reality is that anyone actually paying attention will have noticed that Trump is not alleged to have said anything about colors or race — and that’s true whether Dick Durbin, a man known for being loose with the truth, accurately or inaccurately quoted the president. (My money’s on the latter.) It was Democrats who inserted racism into the issue by associating blacks and Hispanics with “shitholes.” Their association; not Trump’s.
Isn’t that racist kind of word association typical for Democrats? Give them a derogatory term and their innate racism kicks in.
Before I get to examples of this predictable Democrat racism, I’d like you first to refresh your memory of the famous “Nudge, nudge, wink, wink” Monty Python sketch in which a leering Eric Idle brilliantly projects his salacious thoughts on an entirely innocent Terry Jones:
Terry Jones is has no complicity in or responsibility for Idle’s sleazy fantasies. The same is true for conservatives, who judge people by their values (something over which they have control) rather than by their skin color (which is up to God or Nature, whichever you believe). It’s the Democrats who impute nasty meanings to innocently uttered phrases (at least innocently uttered in racial terms).
Up until Trump’s alleged racism went viral, the most recent example of this pathological racist projection was the Left’s fury over an H&M advertisement. Be honest with me: When you see the image below, do you think “My son (or grandson) would love that sweatshirt” or do you think “Black people are monkeys”?
I can say without hesitation that I think the former. Democrats and fellow Leftists, also without hesitation, think the latter. We shouldn’t be surprised. Democrats have likened blacks to monkeys and apes for more than a century.
The boy’s mother, incidentally, who is African herself, fully understands that there is no connection between her son and simians. But to a Democrat, the racist association is instantaneous. Black people are apes. And just as some say the Germans have never forgiven the Jews for Auschwitz, so too is it true that the Democrats cannot forgive Trump and other conservatives for reminding Democrats just how nasty the racism-brined Democrat brain is.
Here’s another example: The word “thug.” To me, a thug is a street-level criminal. That’s all. If I want to dig deeper, I might enjoy the fact that it’s a borrowed word, from the Hindi word “thag,” which translates literally to a “rogue” or a “cheat.” I’ve always liked word origin stories.
But to the Democrat, thug, being a word with negative connotations, is code for a black person. I use it innocently, as did Terry Jones, but the Left, in full Eric Idle mode, makes it racist and then has the temerity to blame me (or any other literate conservative who accurately uses the word).
When President Bush appointed Condi Rice as his Secretary of State, Democrats promptly engaged in an orgy of racist imagery against her. (During and immediately after the Bush years, the fact is that they flung racist imagery against any conservative black person.)
Yet another example of the Democrats’ reflexive habit of associating minorities with negative concepts is the Democrats’ insistence that, when Trump said that Mexico was not sending us its best people, he was guilty of open racism. You and I understood that Trump was saying that Mexico, like all nations, is home to a variety of people, ranging from the exemplary to the Charles Mansons of the world. We also understood that he was saying that Mexico has a nasty habit of purging its country of the Charles Manson types by encouraging them to immigrate illegally to America. That’s not a slur against Mexicans. After all, we have our home grown Charles Mansons. It is, instead, a realistic statement of a despicable policy from a neighboring country, unrelated to race.
And of course, there’s the latest example of the Democrats’ race hatred: Dick Durbin’s dubious claim that President Trump questioned why Americans would want an influx of immigrants from “shithole countries.” When I hear the phrase “shithole countries,” I think of those countries with the toxic values I described above. Race is not on my list. I bet you’re the same.
To Democrats, though, “shithole” can mean only one thing: Black or Hispanic. That’s their word association. It’s their Rorschach test. It’s they who are the racists. They are the evil, disgusting ones who routinely associates blacks and Hispanics with all that is vile and criminal in this world.
I am not making friends (or, probably, keeping them) on Facebook now. That’s because, as I go through my Progressive friends’ post and finding them hurling the worst kind of invective at Trump for his alleged racism, I keep pointing out to them that, under any telling of the story, Trump never mentioned race. The negative racial connotations are all theirs. They are the racists. They’re the ones who heard the dog whistle. On this Alinsky nailed it. I’m making them live up to their own rules.
(Sorry if this is a bit of a choppy post. It started in my mind as a uniform whole, but I got interrupted so often, it fell into little puzzle pieces of ideas.)
I’ll give the last (somewhat vulgar) words to Paul Joseph Watson who nails things as he usually does:
*I realized as I wrote those words that, if Hollywood were a separate country, we wouldn’t want immigrants from there either, given that community’s anti-Americanism, and its sordid, predatory sexual practices against men, women, and children.