2004 July 19 Monday
Heather Mac Donald: The Immigrant Gang Plague
Heather Mac Donald's latest article on immigration paints an even bleaker picture of current immigration trends than Heather's last article on the subject.
Upward mobility to the suburbs doesn’t necessarily break the allure of gang culture. An immigration agent reports that in the middle-class suburbs of southwest Miami, second- and third-generation Hispanic youths are perpetrating home invasions, robberies, battery, drug sales, and rape. Kevin Ruiz knows students at the University of California, Irvine who retain their gang connections. Prosecutors in formerly crime-free Ventura County, California, sought an injunction this May against the Colonia Chiques gang after homicides rocketed up; an affidavit supporting the injunction details how Chiques members terrorize the local hospital whenever one of the gang arrives with a gunshot wound. Federal law enforcement officials in Virginia are tracking with alarm the spread of gang violence from Northern Virginia west into the Shenandoah Valley and south toward Charlottesville, a trend so disturbing that they secured federal funds this May to stanch the mayhem. “This is beyond a regional problem. It is, in fact, a national problem,” said FBI assistant director Michael Mason, head of the bureau’s Washington field office.
Open-borders apologists dismiss the Hispanic crime threat by observing that black crime rates are even higher. True, but irrelevant: the black population is not growing, whereas Hispanic immigration is reaching virtually every part of the country, sometimes radically changing local demographics. With a felony arrest rate up to triple that of whites, Hispanics can dramatically raise community crime levels.
Heather's closing argument is one I fully subscribe to:
Immigration optimists, ever ready to trumpet the benefits of today’s immigration wave, have refused to acknowledge its costs. Foremost among them are skyrocketing gang crime and an expanding underclass. Until the country figures out how to reduce these costs, maintaining the current open-borders regime is folly. We should enforce our immigration laws and select immigrants on skills and likely upward mobility, not success in sneaking across the border.
Her article is quite lengthy. I strongly urge you all to read it in full.
Also see my previous post: Heather Mac Donald On The Illegal Alien Crime Wave.
Now you know why Orrin Judd insists on living in New Hampshire.
Last I read (which was a year or two ago) the Judds were in favor of Hispanic immigration and saw these immigrants as pro-family future Republicans. I posted on their site arguing that a Hispanic illegitimate rate about double the white rate combined with high poverty rates even in the later generations argues against this outcome. Not sure if they have changed their minds. Have they?
My comment was aimed at Judd's delirious support for mass immigration and often stated disdain of whites while insisting on living in the second whitest state in the union.
"New Hampsire Neo-Con" can now take it's place alongside "Vermont Socialist" as a euphemism for smug,blatant hypocrisy.The man's simply appalling,he's one of the symptoms of why I think things will get much worse before they get better.
If these gang members had a bit more about them, besides physical bravery and truculence they would really be a force to be reckoned with. They almost seem like a body looking for a brain. If they came together instead of fighting each other they could sweep what's left of the old California into the sea.
It's quaint how the problem is called a crime problem when in reality the gangs are a proto-state vying with the official state. A state is the institution that has the monopoly on the use of force. It seems California has lost that monopoly. The authority of the state in some neighborhoods in LA lasts for as long it takes for the police to drive through. When the police cruiser leaves the authority of the state leaves with it and it reverts back to the control of the gang. This whole article is about gangs meting out justice, providing social services, serving as a receptacle for peoples' aspirations, engendering devotion and loyalty. What more can a state do? It's not really a matter of whether the gangs do these things well or badly. There are lots of real states that are basket cases yet they exist as such.
We talk about gang crime because it gives us hope as conjured up by the phrases "paying your debt to society." But that is outdated. One could say there are many societies right now. Peace of a sort will be restored when one of them wins decisively. I'm not betting on the old California to win: gated communities are not much of a defensive position.
William Lind has written about this (my due citation, so to speak) in his article: "Dead Leaves and Dry Bones." http://www.lewrockwell.com/lind/lind12.html
It's sobering to read. That or I should quit watching those shows on the History Channel about the barbarians in the latter days of the Roman Empire. Who as you know were brought into the empire to do the work Romans didn't want to do - like fighting other barbarians. And to continue the parallel between now and then, these "immigrants" were held in a barely concealed contempt, as in good enough to do the dirty work but not quite good enough to be accepted as equals. They exacted their revenge on the Romans eventually.
"if these gang members had a bit more about them, besides physical bravery and truculence they would really be a force to be reckoned with"
"this whole article is about gangs meting out justice, providing social services, serving as a receptacle for peoples' aspirations, engendering devotion and loyalty. What more can a state do?"
Provide a national mythology to organize around and our multicultural policies of promoting ethnic/cultural seperatism/supremacism provides them with that mythology,all thay need is a leader class that doesn't value inclusion in the current establishment but would rather become a new establishment on their own terms.The white trendy-left elite,convinced they know what's good for everyone,see these people only as easy votes and submissive domestics.That they could ever have their own agenda is just something the trendy-left can't grasp.
I feel like I'm reading a review of I, Robot.
"I feel like I'm reading a review of I, Robot."
Not that witty and adds nothing whatsoever to the discussion.
Also,you can walk out of the movie or even refuse to go at all.
The best way to describe the various nationalities of the immigrants is that of "market" vs. "non-market" people. Market-majority people (Asians) tend to have high IQ, work and study hard, and are very entrepreneurial. I know many Asians (mostly Chinese) in California. These people tend to be high-tech entrepreneurs and, when they move into a neighborhood, crime and social decay tends to go away. Clearly, Asian immigration is of benefit to the U.S.
Sadly, this is not the case for hispanics. They drop out of school, constitute a new underclass, and become an economic and social burden on the U.S. This cannot be accepted.
It is absolutely essential that the immmigration system needs to be reformed to favor people of high IQ, high parential investment in children, and high probability for upward mobility. Allowing non-market people into the U.S. is long-term death to our civilization. It is absolutely nuts that we continue to do this.
It is vital for the continued survival of Western civilization that it always remain a "market-majority" civilization.
Rushton and others have commented extensively on the cultural differences between "northern" and "southern" people. Northern people have strong work ethic, high regard for educational achievement, greater amount of parential investment in smaller numbers of kids, and form more peaceful, prosperous societies. Southern people are pretty much the opposite of this. They tend to have large numbers of kids and invest relatively little (in terms of education) in them.
I think the concept of parential investment is extremely important for a modern, technological civilization.