2008 February 23 Saturday
Christopher Buckley Postures Against Immigration Law Enforcement
Writing in the quite liberal New York Times Christopher Buckley, a former aide to George H.W. Bush and son of William F. Buckley, tries to defend John McCain against conservative criticisms by claiming that Hispanics are conservatives.
True, too, on immigration, Mr. McCain has allied himself with the Archfiend, Ted Kennedy. It’s also true — odd — that Mr. McCain is popular among Hispanic voters, who are themselves paradigms of cultural conservatism and without whose support any “conservative” candidate for president may be doomed to failure.
If Hispanics are conservatives then why can the Democrats rely on large majorities of Hispanics to almost always vote for Democrats? If Hispanics are conservatives then why do they have far higher rates of out-of-wedlock births? Just what makes establishment pseudo-conservatives like Christopher Buckley so eager to proclaim the myth of Hispanic conservatism?
Next Buckley seems to imply that anyone who has broken the law has lost the right to demand law enforcement.
(It would be interesting, by the way, to hear from Mr. Limbaugh, Ms. Coulter and Mr. Hannity as to whether they’ve ever availed themselves of the services of illegal immigrants. Answer carefully, now: that ambassadorship could be at stake!)
Mr. Buckley doesn't think laws should be enforced at midnight?
Is the “conservative” position on immigration that the only solution is a wall and midnight roundups by Border Patrol agents at Wal-Mart?
Is the pseudo-conservative position that open borders is the only solution?
I watched in horror in the nineties as the conservative movement in magazines and television and syndicated newspaper columns got taken over by neo-conservatives whom I knew weren't really conservatives at all. This is the fruit (Buckley) that it reaps.
I had never seen a Mexican until 1990 in Nashville. By 1995 they were everywhere. By 2004, you were outnumbered badly in many places by them. Whites have fled the city, whose south-side doesn't look anything like the city did in the eighties at all.
Hispanics voted 70 percent democrat in the last election. GOP operatives think that they can scare Hispanics with Jesus and Armageddon and rapture reverends, but will find that like blacks who attend church, it will simply not work. They will vote their own economic self interest, not personally have abortions, and be reliable democrats.
In the last election blacks voted 88 percent democrat, hispanics 70 percent democrat, and asians 63 percent democrat. The GOP hierarchy, completely whored out to big coroprate money, will not see the folly of getting the only voting bloc they ever win, whites, outnumbered until its basically too late and they cant win a presidency to save their ass. Obama, who should be easy as hell to beat, especially while facing "terism'", will be difficult to beat. Whites are ageing and lessening here in America, minorities surging in number. Its simple math, very simple math. Kerry only lost becasue of a few counties in Ohio, that is all. Kerry was a lousy, boring, establishment, arc, condescending, horse-faced candidate. He still almost beat a wartime president.
Our big corporations, with dreams of going absolutely global, need cheap labor in the now, but in the long run they are going to find the electoral consequences of that cheap labor more expensive than they ever imagined. We now cannot imagine pre-Reagan era taxation, but it will come back someday, with the help of the new electorate that they helped import. They will be the most dissapointed fools of them all when they find that all the rhetoric in the world cant get the "new" voters good and scared of high taxes on incomes over 100K (because so few of them will make that kind of money). How will we compete with the give-aways, set-asides, and government generosity that the Dems will offer these people at this time? We cant, not without being de facto socialists ourselves.
Damned...............Blacks go to traditionally conservative Protestant BABTIST churches (and look how they vote) , hispanics to traditionally center-left catholic churches (just think of how they will vote, will they still want six bucks an hour when they can vote for more......I mean, duh). Is Buckley this stupid? or is he just a dishonest neocon/globalist who will support their vision of the universal nation and globalism at all cost and at risk to the republic. The consequences of them being wrong (and they are) are enormous for our grandkids who will shoulder the burden of our experiment in multiculturalism.
Why are Republicans in thrall to the fiction that Hispanics are conservative? I can think of several reasons:
1) They're stupid. (E.g., can't tell a Cuban from a Mexican. Not that Cubans are going to be voting GOP in the future, either.)
2) They're using the word "conservative" accurately, they just have an entirely different context in mind. When we think "conservative", we're thinking of the values of the old, Anglo republic. They're thinking of patrón and peon. I think we've reached a point where Latin American social structures are simply vastly more appealing to our ruling class than that of boring old bourgeois Anglo-America. And not just the upper-classes, either. I'm astonished and dismayed by successful middle-class people I've known, who, having traveled a bit and been seduced by the exceptionally pleasant life-styles of their business counterparts in the more southerly parts of the hemisphere, come home and proceed to ape them in their gated communities (maintained completely by cheap illegal labor, as are many of their businesses), and to champion the policies that allow them to do so. All GOPers of course, who mouth all the right pieties about conservative values, honesty, integrity, blah blah blah. (I knew their parents, who must be turning in their graves. From civic virtue to thoughtless corruption in one generation flat.)
3) Republicans? What Republicans? What Democrats? The one party state is already here. It's not as if current GOP poo-bahs are going to be stripped of power and wealth - they'll manage just fine, no matter who Hispanics vote for this year of the next. Only chumps have some weird attachment to this thing called "GOP". Once all those lovely "conservative" Latin values are in place, they can still easily maintain electoral power with their political "rivals". Just keep up the populist demagoguery on ignorant voters, and you can remain in power, do nothing for the lower orders, and just keep getting richer. Works for Latin America, it'll work just fine here once the glories of globalization have finished off the white middle-class.
Ugly truth - "Is Buckley this stupid? or is he just a dishonest neocon/globalist who will support their vision of the universal nation and globalism at all cost and at risk to the republic. The consequences of them being wrong (and they are) are enormous for our grandkids who will shoulder the burden of our experiment in multiculturalism."
Yes, our grandkids will be screwed. Buckley's will probably be sitting pretty. Why should he care?
I try to explain this to black folks all the time: with only 50% of America being white, you can kiss off all that affirmative action stuff.
One old black guy actually gave me pause. He said he welcomed Mexicans because they were going to kick blacks in the @ss and get them back to work, whereas white folks were just going to continue to corrupt black folks by giving in to guilt.
In other words, the Mexicans by their presence, example and vote, were going to be like the nanny on that Nanny TV show who teaches liberal parents (read: white folks) how to handle their kids (read: blacks).
Hearing that from a elderly black man stopped me in my tracks.
"I try to explain this to black folks all the time: with only 50% of America being white, you can kiss off all that affirmative action stuff."
The other, and I think more likely outcome will be that affirmative action statutes will remain in place. Effectively it will be legal to discriminate against people because of their race, in this case caucasian.
What this eventually means is unclear. I suppose the most benign result would be that, in a country with no majority ethnic group, there will be some sort of quota system adopted so that everyone is legally assured a seat at the table (goodbye meritocracy). The extreme would be the partition of the United States into two or more nation-states, basically along ethnic/cultural/linguistic lines.