mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
Immigration and 2016
Saving America from a European Future

Ben Domenech, in a powerful Federalist column published Friday, identifies white identity politics as one of the driving forces behind the destructive appeal of Donald Trump’s populism. Trump’s success is a sign of a very great threat to the American right, Domenech says; it could transform the GOP from being a “fusionist ideological coalition with a shared belief in limited government” to a party that caters specifically and exclusively to the grievances and resentments of downtrodden whites. Such a path would be fatal to the cause of limited government, and would instead lead the GOP down the path taken by proto-fascist parties of the European right. One key passage:

“Identity politics for white people” is not the same thing as “racism”, nor are the people who advocate for it necessarily racist, though of course the categories overlap. In fact, white identity politics was at one point the underlying trend for the majoritarian American cultural mainstream. But since the late 1960s, it has been transitioning in fits and starts into something more insular and distinct. Now, half a century later, the Trump moment very much illuminates its function as one interest group among many, as opposed to the background context for everything the nation does. The white American with the high-school education who works at the duck-feed factory in northern Indiana has as much right to advance his interest as anyone else. But that interest is now being redefined in very narrow terms, in opposition to the interests of other ethnic groups, and in a marked departure from the expansive view of the freedoms of a common humanity advanced by the Founders and Abraham Lincoln.

Domenech is right that Trump and his immigration plan raise the specter of a GOP driven by white identity politics in a particularly vivid way. He is also right that the problem goes much deeper than Trump, who is, as he points out, merely benefiting from an anger and resentment that was already there. America is growing more and more diverse. Once the “cultural mainstream”, whites are becoming just one ethnic group among many. As that happens, the danger is that the GOP, which got 88 percent of its votes from whites in 2012, gives up on creating a coalition bound together by ideology and instead resorts to ginning up resentment among aggrieved members of its base.

If that transformation happens, Domenech argues, we would be faced with a European-style future, where the failure of the elites to respect the will of the large swathes of people creates an increasingly illiberal right-wing backlash, which in turn drives moderates to vote for the left, and so on in cycles.

The best way to avert that future is to cut to the heart of the matter: immigration. The right must embrace and pass meaningful immigration reform that proves to the American public that it really does intend to enforce the nation’s borders. As Nick Gallagher argued in these pages on Thursday, reform does not have to be anti-immigrant or even anti-immigration. It could and probably should involve higher levels of legal immigration than we have right now and some form of amnesty. But the first, most indispensable steps must be to enforce the nation’s immigration laws and secure the borders.

Until the GOP regains its constituents’ trust on this issue, the populist fervor buoying Trump will likely grow in intensity and scope. The way out of this mess is to outflank and isolate the Trumpians by tackling the immigration problem head on. GOP leaders must address Americans’ legitimate concerns about immigration, or risk seeing their party, and the country as a whole, slide down the ugly path that European nativists are taking.

Features Icon
show comments
  • rheddles

    No immigration without assimilation; that is the problem. This is not the fault of the immigrants, we’ve done it to ourselves. The 1964 legislation needs substantial revision, starting with the elimination of dual citizenship.

    • Harry Heller

      No, we need a 100 year moratorium on any more nonwhite immigrants (and let any white immigrants be highly skilled).

      • rheddles

        Yeah, Don’t want anybody like Condoleza Rice or Ben Carson fouling the nest. I don’t mind an ideological test, but not a racial one.

        • SeenItAllBefore

          They were not immigrants but born and raised here by excellent parents.

          • Hominid

            Nope! They just got a good set of genes. That’s what matters.

          • fastrackn1

            “good set of genes. That’s what matters.”

            Nice to finally see someone else on this board who understands that the biology and science that applies to all the other organisms on this planet, also applies to humans….

          • Hominid

            Exactly. We have to reject the fallacious humanist ideology of Marx and accept the biological reality of Darwin.

          • fastrackn1

            “We have to reject the fallacious humanist ideology of Marx and accept the biological reality of Darwin.”

            “All men are created equal” was not meant in it’s literal sense.
            Darwinism is reality….

        • fastrackn1

          “Yeah, Don’t want anybody like Condoleza Rice or Ben Carson fouling the nest.”

          There is always a ‘few’ examples in any group…but as an average…there are millions of times more examples of the average…but let’s not talk about that, we’ll just ignore that and pretend it doesn’t exist. Because if we pretend it doesn’t exist, then is must not exist….

        • Hominid

          For every Rice & Carson there hundreds of thousands of stupid, lazy, irresponsible Blacks.

          • rheddles

            And the only way we can tell the difference is by skin color.

          • Hominid

            Only if you’re a moron.

          • Paul

            That’s pretty much the human ratio, though. There is no shortage of stupid and lazy white people, either.

          • Hominid

            That’s right. But, there are two problems you overlook. One is the proportion issue – dysfunctionality is far more common among Blacks than Whites. The other problem is Blacks make excuses for their dysfunctional cohorts, Whites denounce theirs.

    • Hominid

      You’re half correct. It is the Lib-Leftist fault – not “we.” And, illegals are INVADERS who are doing it to us.

  • MarkE

    Last week I was watching Trump on television and I just had
    an overwhelming feeling of déjà vu. Sure…
    that’s it, Archey Bunker. Trump is the Archey Bunker of Presidential candidates,
    right down to asking Fox news to stifle their female reporters.

    We have seen this before in the 70’s and 80’s. Trump is a
    cultural cliché. What is similar between then and now?

    • FriendlyGoat

      There are some similarities. But here’s one difference. Archie Bunker (the “character” as portrayed on the show, not the very-successful show itself , or Carroll O’Connor, the phenomenal actor) was never “winning” in the spirit of how Charlie Sheen used that word a few years ago. Donald Trump has been winning at a lot of games for a long, long time——and he is telling us all these things anyway. He believes there are lots of people who do not know better and WANT to hear his presidential “Archie” routine. Sure enough, apparently there are.

      • Harry Heller

        My thoughts, too (re Trump and Archie – I’ve taken to speaking of “Archie Bunker Americans”), except I LOVED Archie, as did most REAL Americans. I would rather be ruled by Archie than by Obama, Kerry, Bush (any of them), Rubio, Kasich, Hillary, etc.

        • FriendlyGoat

          We loved Archie because he reminded us of so many things we heard “all in our own families”. We also loved him for actually loving Edith in his own way—-even if boisterous. We loved him for seeing the light on some things and helping all of us do likewise.

          I think it’s noteworthy, too, that Carroll O’Connor also created a later show, “In The Heat Of The Night” where he tried at least as hard as Michael Landon to say thoughtful things to America in a TV show.

  • NoNewt

    This article contains one statement – probably the most important of the piece in terms of highlighting the author’s underlying biases – that is highly debatable, and for which absolutely no evidence or cost-benefit logic is given:

    “[The GOP needs to pass immigration legislation that] could and probably should involve higher levels of legal immigration than we have right now.”

    We have record levels of immigration today. What makes anyone say that legal immigration “probably should be expanded”? As Rich Lowry cogently argued in Politico, most of the American public wants less immigration (and not only of the illegal variety):

    The reason Trump has emerged is that many Americans (myself included despite years spent living in various foreign countries) feel immigration levels are too high. What is “too high”? This is obviously a wishy-washy concept that is tough to explain. But if most of the electorate feels this way, does there have to be a clear definition of “too high”? Who knows better than the electorate what should be done with their country (and indeed, their society, their civilization)?

    What’s important is the following: whatever our definition of “too high” is, we see our political “betters” don’t care. They – like this author – feel that ever-increasing immigration levels are only a good thing. We feel overwhelmed, and that we’ve lost control of our destiny as a people. Does anyone know what data tell us “diversity is a good thing”? Does anyone really feel it is an unalloyed good? When it leads to social disintegration, loss of trust, loss of concomitance with one’s neighbors? And yet, our political betters tell us not only that it’s an unalloyed good, but that it’s the only good … and that anything “American” is small-minded and “racist.”

    A fact-based assessment would be a good start. Clearly absolute GDP will increase with each person who enters the country (something every Open Borders advocate from Jeb Bush to Chuck Schumer likes to tell us). But *per capita* GDP will not – and that is what determines living standards/quality of life. Unfortunately, rabid political correctness and a historical revisionism that exalts immigration as the source of diversity (i.e., the only good thing in the country) prevent us from applying an analytical lens to immigration. Any attempt to logically dissect immigration is, we’re told, “racist,” the work of those terrible white people who are, and need to, go the way of the dinosaur in America.

    Not surprisingly, that leaves us with extreme, and bad, choices. The likes of Barack Obama and the “Gang of Eight” fail to understand that immigrants are people … and like all other people, they can be good or bad. I – and I’m sure many others – believe the country can and should let in more skilled immigrants. These are the people who can create new businesses and fill otherwise tough-to-fill high-skilled positions that grow the economy. However, we also need substantially LESS low-skilled immigrants and family/chain migration.

    On balance does that mean we would have more or fewer immigrants? We currently let in about 60K skilled immigrants on H1-Bs per year … compared to about 1M *legal* low-skilled immigrants (primarily via chain migration). If we could reform the system to dramatically limit low-skilled chain migration, would there even be enough skilled immigrants in the world to make up the balance? Would the economy have that great a need for them?

    Likely not; so net-net immigration levels would likely come down in a well-tailored policy reforming legal immigration. But at the end of the day, the American people need to feel they have regained some control over their society’s – and hence their children’s – fate. Immigration cost-benefit analyses are an important first step. But if the people in this democracy prefer lower immigration levels than even the cost-benefit analysis would recommend, that is their prerogative. And every year our political class defies us, we are more likely to move toward an alienated European-style immigration politics. It’s been 50 years of being ignored. Today, 1 in 7 people in the US (nearly 50 million!) is an immigrant. How much further do we go? 1 in 2? More? This justifiably causes some to fear for the existential future of the country. I’m shocked how mainstream politicians from both parties have been deaf to this for 50 years, showing either incredible fatuity or cynicism toward their constituents. For all his flaws, The Donald fills a wiiiiiide-open hole. Shame on America’s politicians for letting such an unserious man be the first to address such a serious problem – and kudos to The Donald for at least having a few guts to stand up against hyper-political correctness.

    • Harry Heller

      Utterly brilliant. My thoughts exactly, and I have been saying all this for 35 years (albeit with ever greater levels of sophistication – and alarm!). You have hit all the main points – and even speak the very language I myself have used of late: eg, that Trump is hardly an ideal standard-bearer, and thus his rise only shows how desperately out of touch these NYC-DC Beltway types are from the REAL American people wrt immigration – and “diversity”, and the “#Only Black Lives Matter” movement, and all the other racial outrages against universal ethical norms that have been foisted upon whites for the past half-century.

      We’re also utterly disgusted with the do-nothing national GOP, the majority of whom run for office as conservatives, and then immediately upon arriving in DC start shilling for large corporations against workers, small businessmen, taxpayers, etc. I don’t think the “elites” can be changed without a “Trumpian” populist political revolution. They are united by both sentimentalist ideological falsehoods, as well as structural economic (self-)interest. The elites need to be violently (at least politically so, though one day perhaps physically) dislodged from power. We may be approaching an inflection point in US history.

      • johnschuh

        I am reminded of Enoch Powell, who sacrificed his political future by warning Britain of the dangers inherent in admitting a unlimited number of colonials into the United Kingdom. To be sure, it was left to Blair really to open the floodgates. The Economist may applaud the end of the UK that was, but I do not.

    • Hominid

      It is also important to oppose the fallacious humanist ideology that requires us to accept all cultures, races, and ethnic groups as equivalent. They aren’t. America is a saxon nation, not a Latino, or African, or Middle Eastern, or Asian nation. There is nothing wrong with nativism – stop letting the Lib-Leftists use it as an accusation.

    • rheddles

      If we could reform the system to dramatically limit low-skilled chain
      migration, would there even be enough skilled immigrants in the world to
      make up the balance? Would the economy have that great a need for them?

      The answer to both questions is YES. Even The
      Donald recognizes this. He favors granting visas or green cards to all foreign college graduates. Immigrants who are willing to work hard will create all the jobs they need. Some of the best, most patriotic Americans I have known are immigrants. Because they can tell the difference between the hell-hole they left and the US. Unlike so many of our cosmopolitan elites.

      Our problems are that we are admitting too many who just want to get on the welfare gravy train and we have stopped assimilating them.

  • Communism is not My Life

    Donald Trump had tapped into the profound insecurity people feel in their lives due to idiosyncratic risk to their incomes. These risks arise from macroeconomic chaos within the world economic system, which both benefits and suffers from being interconnected. They also come from life-cycle risk that we all face, from varying sources: health issues, divorce, job loss, major repair bills, etc. The solution is to shared these risks socially: Social Security for All.
    The mechanism for achieving this goal is to create a USA sovereign wealth fund that uses $10 Trillion dollars created by the Federal Reserve, based on congressional legislation, to purchase a 50% interest in all for-profit businesses, then uses its share of profits to created a $25,000/year basic income for all legal citizens between 18 and 65 years of age, which citizens can withdraw weekly, monthly, or yearly, or $50,000 once every three years. In addition, all income-based taxes should be eliminated, replaced with a .005% transaction tax paid on all transactions cleared through the US banking system, enforced by a no-pay, no litigation in court proviso. This would given producers an incentive to increase the supply of products and services necessary to balance the increased demand that the basic income would support.
    Social Security for All would be a no-loser policy that would provide collectivists and individualists (or liberals and conservatives, if you prefer that terminology) what they desire: non-paternalistic income smoothing, through society-side risk sharing via social insurance, for collectivist/egalitarians, and incentives to produce and invest for individualists. Donald Trump, meet Bernie Sanders.

    • FriendlyGoat

      Ten trillion dollars from thin air to purchase half of all for-profit businesses and distribute dividends to everyone? Sounds unique.
      I wonder if we should have done that BEFORE the Fed actually created several trillion from thin air (without congressional legislation) and pumped up the value of stocks for basically the class of people who already owned them.

      • fastrackn1

        “and pumped up the value of stocks for basically the more-limited group of people who already owned them.”

        Almost everyone benefits from the higher value of stocks…including the millions of average Joe’s who have 401K’s and pensions, etc….

        • FriendlyGoat

          True, of course. But we do still know which half of Americans actually own the preponderance of equities.

          • fastrackn1

            “But we do still know which half of Americans actually own the preponderance of equities.”

            Yes we do.
            And those equities were mostly purchased by that “half” on the open market, and of their own accord…average Joe can also do the same if he chooses….

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yes, there were the purchased shares. And, yes, there were the inherited shares.

          • fastrackn1

            “Yes, there were the purchased shares. And, yes, there were the inherited shares.”

            And as I previously stated, “average Joe can do the same if he chooses”, because the equities markets are open to everyone.
            If average Joe chose not to learn about investing (maybe because he is too content with how his union bosses are taking care of him, or simply just waiting for his comfy pension he will get when he takes his early retirement), or he makes bad decisions in his life, and because of choices he made in his life, didn’t elevate his financial portfolio, then who’s fault is that? The wealthy guy who did??
            Even if the wealthy guy got his start with a large inheritance, so what?…some people are lucky…oh well.
            I wish I had a large inheritance coming. If I did, I sure is hell don’t think anyone else would deserve a piece of it.
            Most who have little or nothing, especially in the US, are there because of choices they made in life.
            All men are not created equal….

          • FriendlyGoat

            One only needs to look at the refugees fleeing the consequences of ridiculously-skewed wealth distribution in many places of the world—-including our southern border—-to know we are going to need something more than “be an investor” to cure society for billions of folks.

            You are right about some people who have achieved good wealth accumulation through diligence. But the model we now have is widening the gap in the aggregate, so we need some other policy IN ADDITION TO mere market opportunity. Everyone knows that electronics are increasingly rigging markets in several different ways too.

          • fastrackn1

            We are a very long, long, way from the conditions of countries like you mention. I have traveled to many 3rd-world countries (even my wife is from Kenya), and I can tell you that there is plenty of opportunity here…probably more than any other place on earth. A large part of the problem is that the wealthier a country gets, the more complacent it’s citizens get…it is just human nature.

            What I see as the biggest problem that is widening the wealth gap is the regulation, and corporatization of America…and I don’t mean corporatization as in the transforming of government institutions into private institutions (the traditional definition). I mean that businesses (including what I do), are getting bigger and bigger, and it is getting harder and harder to enter business fields, or to compete when you do. It has been a very stealthy process, and something that has been creeping up on us for the last 100 years, but no one ever talks about it. The power the large corporations wield over their employees, their suppliers and other businesses that do business with them, politics, etc., is scary and dangerous, and it is not slowing down, but ever increasing.

            Google ‘corporatization of America’ and you will find plenty of info….

          • FriendlyGoat

            I guess this is why I have always been in favor of higher high-end taxation on both the organizations you mention and their CEOs and shareholders. I haven’t looked them up, but I’m going to guess the leaders of Pulte, D.R. Horton, Meritage. Beazer, Ryland, Hovnanian, KB Homes, NVR, Lennar and the former Centex have all made absolute fortunes making your life difficult.

    • Harry Heller

      I think communism is the heart of your life. You are right about the insecurity, however. The answer is free-market (not crony-) capitalism.

  • qet

    That article verges on bad faith. I said in a comment to it that this so-called “white identity politics” or whatever mutation of that trope you prefer is the result of every other racial and ethnic group in this country defining their politics as nothing more than a catalog of grievances against white people and “whiteness,” so that for a white person to disagree in any way with those politics is taken as Q.E.D. proof of “white identity politics.” White identity politics is a fiction created by non-whites and Domenech ought to know better, as should TAI.

    Here is today’s data point: Ann Ravel, Democratic chair of the FEC, “has complained that super PACs are “95 percent run by white men,” and that as a result, “the people who get the money are generally also white men.” (

    This is the sort of statement you see every day emanating from any number of places. The presence of white people unalloyed with non-whites is per se suspicious if not sinister. Now, this woman is merely being a propagandist, but this kind of thing represents American politics in 2015.

    • Hominid

      Very well said.

  • wigwag

    Domenech just doesn’t understand the Trump phenomenon; he’s as clueless as Professor Mead and his mignons when it comes to the Donald’s popularity. It’s not that Trump threatens to create a white identity movement, it that Trump threatens to create a ordinary persons movement. The sky’s the limit for Trump because ordinary people come in all colors, genders and even political persuasions.

    The Democratic Party would be perfectly happy with a credo that says, “black lives matter.” It would also be delighted with a credo that says, Latino lives matter, Muslim lives matter, feminists lives matter, gay lives matter, transgendered lives matter, professors lives matter and journalists lives matter. The problem is not that the Democrats are passionate believers in the lives of blacks, Latinos, Muslims, feminists, homosexuals, professors, journalists or the transgendered. The problem is that they so plainly don’t care about the lives of anyone else.

    The GOP could live very happily with a credo that says billionaires lives matter. They would also be happy announcing that hedge fund lives matter, fetal lives matter, the Bush Families lives matter, defense contractors lives matter and insurance executives lives matter. The cohort of GOP primary voters planning to vote for Trump have figured out that their lives simply don’t matter to GOP elites or the incredibly weak group of slimy politicians seeking to attract their votes.

    My bet is that Trump is on his way to increasing popularity in both political parties. The Democrats and the Republicans have abandoned ordinary voters, why shouldn’t ordinary voters abandon them?

    It’s not about a white identity movement, it’s about ordinary people who are increasingly marginalized by both political parties staking their claim. Don’t be surprised if Trump does better than expected amongst blacks and Latinos. You don’t need to be white to be fed up.

    • John Dowd

      This is very good analysis “wigwag”. I would add one thing however. As Ann Coulter noted in her latest book “Adios America” Mitt Romney received an unprecedented 25% of the young male black vote in 2012. The smarter (but still evil) liberal democrat have probably noted this but dare not voice their fears least the Democrat coalition begins to break apart. Their biggest fear is that Trump can outdo what Reagan did and mobilize the “Reagan Democrats” to overwhelm Democrat ethnic coalition while simultaneously cutting into that coalition. The young unemployed black men have been victims of the open borders policy and are ripe for the picking.

      • wigwag

        While Trump’s stance on immigration gets all the press, at every political appearance he says something that surely resonates with a majority of Americans; “America never wins anymore.”

        He’s right. Since the 1950s, all of our hot wars have ended poorly; most recently we lost to a bunch of tin plated Mullahs in Iran.

        It’s the political class and both political parties that are responsible for this remarkable record of failure.

        It’s a theme that transcends political persuasions and ethnic and racial groups. If the other GOP candidates think they can respond to it by trotting out their position papers or bragging about their records, they’re mistaken. No one takes their position papers seriously; it’s the same old same old. As for their records, none of them are particularly impressive.

        Democrats and Republicans are sick of losing. Most Americans are sick of politicians and their lies.

        Trump benefits from all of this.

        • fastrackn1

          WW, both of your writings on this article are very well said.

          “Most Americans are sick of politicians and their lies.”

          Exactly, and I am one of them.

          If Trump gets the nomination I will do something that I haven’t done (and thought I might never do again), since Ronald Reagan…vote….

          • Hominid

            Ted Cruz is way better than Trump.

          • fastrackn1

            That’s a matter of opinion, like any choice of candidate.
            Cruz is a politician. I am not going to vote for another politician again…which is why I haven’t voted since Reagan.
            If Trump doesn’t screw up and actually gets the nomination, I’ll vote for him. If not, then I will wait for the next non-politician to run….

          • Hominid

            Cruz is the man we want. Your strategy is stupid.

          • fastrackn1

            Cruz is the man ‘you’ want….

          • Hominid

            Duh! AS if I haven’t I made that clear. And, if you’re a genuine American with a brain, he’s the man you should want, too.

          • fastrackn1

            “Genuine American”…well being that I was born here in America, that makes me a ‘genuine American’ no matter who I vote for.
            So Americans are only ‘genuine’ if they vote for the same person as you…okay pal…if you say so.

            BTW, you used the word “we” in your comment when addressing me, so that implies that ‘we’ both want Cruz, but he is not the man ‘we’ want, he is the man ‘you’ want….

          • Hominid

            You’re part of the problem – too many ‘citizens’ who reside here but don’t care for Americanism.

          • fastrackn1

            I do care for Americanism, but maybe just differently than you.
            It is the reason I spend time on TAI learning from, and engaging with, others…especially those who view things differently than me…although I don’t call them ‘stupid’, ‘dumb’, etc., but I do engage in healthy, spirited debate at times.

            If I didn’t care about America I wouldn’t spend my precious free time on TAI or other places where I can learn more about America and the rest of the world, I would spend my free time doing useless activities like watching sports or riding around in circles on a jet ski or an ATV, etc.

          • Hominid

            Aren’t YOU special?!?!

          • fastrackn1

            Yes I am, thank you! I knew you would notice sooner or later!

            23,000+ comments Hominid?, YIKES!…you must be very lonely or have nothing else to do?…is that it?….

            …although most of your comments are 1 or 2 liners with little or no substance, just name calling…perhaps you are only in your teens or twenties…that would explain your commentary….

          • Hominid

            Try retired PhD / MD who can multitask and has a low tolerance for fools and an even lower tolerance for marxists. YIKES!

          • fastrackn1

            Yes, I can tell by the content of your comments that you are a PHD/MD for sure.
            Well I am too, but I have 4 PHD’s and I am also a Nobel Laureate.
            Have you ever heard of the International Space Station? Well I invented that…and in my spare time, being the multitasker that I also am.

            …yep…I invented it while also mapping the human genome and inventing Google…along with my girlfriends Loni Anderson and Morgan Fairchild…yeah, yeah, that’s it!, that’s the ticket!….

          • Hominid

            So, you prefer your make believe to reality – typical Lib.

          • fastrackn1

            After years on the net I have always wanted to converse with a troll just to see how it goes.
            It has been rather uninteresting and uneventful as I thought it would be…just quick one and two line responses from the troll that have little or nothing to do with the conversation, but i wanted to see how long I could keep it going. Scrolling through the troll’s messages to others reveals the same meaningless responses that only attack. I could have mentioned how only a complete idiot would even consider voting for a clown politician like Ted Cruz, just to see how the troll would respond, but I took the high road because I didn’t want to drag on the conversation.
            Sorry troll, but you are boring me now….

          • John Hopson

            Up yours Bozo. Ted Cruz is one of the establishment hacks “we” don’t want. Cruz, Rubio, Paul and Graham all voted for the Corker Amendment which was designed to give the Marxist Messiah Obama the votes he needed to override a Senate veto which would have prevented Obama from giving his terrorist buds in Iran $150 Billion, ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. Every single member of the so called Senatorial Republican establishment voted for the Corker Amendment….except Tom Cotton. You can take Ted Cruz and stuff him where the sun don’t shine. He’s just another establishment hack flying under a false flag. As for who has a brain and who doesn’t, it’s not you Bozo.

          • KlugerRD

            “John Hopson” who replied to you is some old geezer in Florida who makes “get off the lawn” abusive comments all day.

          • Hominid

            Yeah – he seemed pretty grouchy.

      • johnschuh

        Indeed. `That is evidence that some blacks are not realizing that they have far mor win common culturally with whites than they do with Latinos.

        • Hominid

          You need to live 24/7 in the hood in any major city – it will change your tune real fast.

          • johnschuh

            You are talking about the types that have taken over Baltimore. Yes. even going back the zootsuit days there have been Latinos who have cottoned to the Sportin’life style. But inLA the Mexicans are starting to push out the blacks. Within a decade or so things will happen.

    • Proud Skeptic

      The word is “minions”, not “mignons”.

      • wigwag

        Thanks. I appreciate the correction.

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    Immigration is at a historical high, and the American citizens in the middle and lower classes can see the immigrants stealing an unearned and undeserved share of the National Inheritance that rightly belongs to them. They see their jobs going to immigrants, they see their wages falling further and further behind because of the excess supply of workers. They see immigrants NOT assimilating, learning to speak English, adopting the American Culture that values small Government, education, the rule of law, and Freedom, while retaining the inferior Cultures that these immigrants are supposedly running from. American Citizens are sick of having the Political Elites tell them that immigrants are good for the Nation when the opposite is so clearly the TRUTH. The Leftists think this is about racism, and use that stick to beat the middle and lower class Americans into accepting massive immigration. But this is NOT the reality. Americans are only seeking to protect what’s their’s and their families, and the National Inheritance that their ancestors gave to them so that they can pass it on to their children.

    • Harry Heller

      Exactly. The GOP fools should come out to CA and see how immigration has ruined the state – and made Republicans here, even ones who pander to Hispanics, completely unelectable.

    • Mike M

      No, you’re right, it’s not about racism at all. It’s about “nativism” — it’s all about us people who’ve lived here for years (decades? maybe a hundred or two years? maybe a thousand?) being invaded by hordes of people who didn’t grow up here, who didn’t take care of this land and build communities based upon sacred principles. Oh wait. I thought we were talking about the Euros invading North America and killing off the indigenous peoples who had lived on the land for hundreds & thousands of years. Thank goodness we’ve forgotten this (or explain it away).

      • Hominid

        Have you given back your part of the loot? Hypocrite much?

        • fastrackn1

          He could always donate his house and all of his other personal belongings to his favorite Indian Reservation….

        • Mike M

          Sure, absolutely I’m a hypocrite. I try to make amends best I can. Not calling people names and instead trying to point out logical inconsistencies is a nice start. How about you?

          • Hominid

            What “amend” have you “tried” to make? Running your mouth is a “nice start”? Bwahahahaha!!!

          • Mike M

            Sorry, I forgot who I was trying to converse with. As a veteran and former small business owner myself, I guess I was expecting more. But you can’t do that, can you?

  • Anthony

    Somewhere long ago someone taught me formally that the “American Creed” provides a starting point for Americans (most) to evaluate issues, candidates, and government actions. That is, the dominant political culture in the United States consist of beliefs in tenets of creed. Now, where does Donald Trump, immigration, and identity politics fit in comes to mind after reading, hearing, and seeing such hub bub. My take is that in a country as large as U.S. and with a narrative emphasizing various hierarchies (social construct race being most antagonistically used) and social competition among various characters (as well as all the psychic baggage it represents) the Trump phenomenon is recrudescent.

    Donald Trump and claims to some new form of identity politics may or may not be credible but Trump’s resonance among segments of the American polity reflects competing interpretations (consciously or unconsciously) of what America stands for: different interpretations of beliefs and values in the American Creed. Combine that with economic stagnation and all that it brings (when an economy stagnates the importance people attach to doing better than others against whom they compare themselves is more intense), frustration, intolerance, less generosity, and resistance to greater openness become sentiments to exploit by deft and not so deft practitioners of the fine art.

    Mobility, either economic or social is threatening (especially when the others are legitimate competitors and the possibility of moving up or down compared to prevailing societal norms exists existentially ) and such recognition may interfere with aspirations as well as set into motion fear and anger (powerful human catalysts). As backdrop to hub bub about Trump and points of tension in body politic, the 2015 churn vis-a-vis Donald Trump reflects America’s consistent struggle with its true cultural mosaic – cultural beliefs and values expanded and embedded in American Creed. In that light, identity politics is a relatively recent term used to perhaps refine the American Creed for some – a focus on group identity. That said, a caveat: America purports formally to function on Creed but in practice rewards groups which may actually be the plural but equal model espoused by some.

  • FriendlyGoat

    It’s important for Mr. Trump to paint as many immigrants as possible as criminals, rapists, drug peddlers—–the worst Mexico can find to send us, etc.—–in order to get ordinary working-class (the fed-up class) voters to agree to “deport them all” so as to elect Mr. Trump

    THE PROBLEM is that none of this is the sentiment or the desire of the business community which is traditionally the “other” core of the Republican Party. . George W. Bush once talked about “guest workers” and all the employers of immigrants (both illegal in lower-end jobs and legal in higher-end jobs) were positively enchanted with that term and idea. Most serious business people are not that crazy about contemplating the labor market with all the immigrants suddenly absent. THAT IS WHY ALL THE IMMIGRANTS ARE NOT GOING TO BE DEPORTED—–NO MATTER WHO IS PRESIDENT. Even if the current immigrants were somehow sent home, there would be an IMMEDIATE plan to bring large (large) numbers of them back in some sort of NOW LEGALIZED guest worker arrangement. Every Trump supporter should stop and think this through. Nothing else could possibly happen, even with Mr. Trump. Business gets what Business wants and the more Republicans you have in office, the MORE that is true.

    • Harry Heller

      Yes, if there is enough outside pressure from dispossessed Americans to threaten (and occasionally carry out, a la Eric Cantor) purges of any immigration-supporting Republicans. Believe me, this isn’t all about Trump. Read,, Chronicles magazine, Dr. Savage, Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter – we have been building up to this moment for a long time. White identity politics was created by PC, multiculti garbage, and unlimited and unnecessary “diversity”. We’re here to stay.

      • FriendlyGoat

        Yes, you have been building up to this moment for a long time. Your mentors have been getting sicker and meaner for a long time—–and richer too, I might add, selling you guys the hatred, one book and one talk radio broadcast after another. Since you’re here to stay, I hope you’ll remember that “white identity” stuff has never been anything but tragedy on a stick.

    • Anthony

      FG, my late Grandmother used to say: common sense ain’t common.

    • fastrackn1

      FG, as a person who uses all Hispanic labor, I can tell you that there are many like me in the business community who would gladly give up that cheap labor if they could all be sent back and kept out. We all use them because no one can be the first guy to make a stand and not use them when everybody else is. They would be out of business.
      If the immigrants were sent back and kept out, then we would all have ‘only’ an American labor pool to hire from and the playing field would be even. We did fine for years without them, so things would just go back to the way they were years ago.
      The business community would whine a bit and then just move on. Besides, higher labor costs would simply be passed on to the consumer anyway. I think Americans could easily handle those higher costs, and it would be worth it for the sake of our country. There are many unseen costs that all the illegals are costing America, so the higher labor costs to the average American would likely be mitigated by the savings to America when they are gone.

      As someone who is always for the little guy as you are, you should like to see the illegals thrown out. It is the jobs of average Joe that have been lost to, or had their wages drastically lowered, by the large influx of illegals over the last 30 or so years….

      • Boritz

        As a “consumer anyway” I would gladly pay an additional $3 for my restaurant entre.

        • fastrackn1

          ” I would gladly pay an additional $3 for my restaurant entre.”

          Me too!
          And I would also gladly pay a few more bucks for my cart of groceries if places like Walmart would pay their employees a living wage.

          All the hype about all the money we Americans save with Walmart, illegal labor, etc. is all just a ruse. Americans don’t ‘save’ money (put it in the bank), they just spend the money on other things they really don’t need….

      • FriendlyGoat

        The government should have fined the employers of illegal workers to the moon a long, long time ago —–causing employers to not hire them and lure them into the USA like a magnet in the first place. Almost all of the needed “enforcement” could have been done on paper by IRS and DOL. But, there has never been the political will in office to actually confront the business community in this manner.

        The idea that Trump is going to round up all these people and throw them out is not a palatable outcome. Actually doing it—-house to house—-would only be possible with a very overbearing type of law enforcement. The reality of what you’re talking about——somehow getting them all—- is jackbooted thug stuff on steroids. No problem going to a high school, grabbing a 16-year-old who was brought here from Mexico at age 2, and dumping her off in Tijuana? You’re dreaming.

        • Fthoma

          If you use E-Verify and cross-checking identity papers to make fraudulent employment very difficult then a large percentage of the illegals will self-deport. The unemployment rate in Mexico is lower than the US rate, so the only reason they come here is for the freebies. Raid a few businesses, put some management in the slammer, and it will become self propagating self deportation.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yes, and about 30 years ago would have been helpful. They didn’t have e-verify then, of course, but most employers who hired people with little to no English had a clue. So also were the Social Security numbers that just didn’t match up when withheld taxes were submitted.

        • fastrackn1

          It’s not about fining the employers, it’s about the government doing it’s job and keeping them out in the first place, not looking the other way with a wink and a nod, not only to placate the business community on the right, but to also placate the voting base, and liberal mentality on the left.

          Of course Trump in not going to simply throw all the illegals out as he says. He and anybody with a lick of sense knows it is not really possible, unless things like you stated above, and worse, would actually happen…and they are not going to…although if they actually did, I would support it.
          What Trump is to people like me and the others who support him, is someone who is not a politician, and is not of the mentality of the political machine. He has accomplished quite a lot in his life in business…more than any politician has. He won’t be able to do exactly as he says when he is running for office, but neither did Oboozo (remember Hope and Change, ha, ha, ha), or any other politician who has run for president. But I believe he will do a lot of things that a politician would never do, and that’s that this country needs right now.

          Many Americans would like to see what someone of trumps background would do if in office. Let’s try a change for 4 years and see what happens. It couldn’t be any worse than the last 25 years….

          • FriendlyGoat

            1) I don’t blame you personally for the competitive nature of your job sites staffed as they are by subs. We needed a leadership culture of this being a complete no-no for all of the business community 20-30 years ago and we just did not get that from our governments.

            2) Mr. Trump may well be the Republican nominee. Whether he will win a general election is another matter.

          • fastrackn1

            “I don’t blame you personally for the competitive nature of your job sites staffed as they are by subs.”

            I know you don’t. I am sure you are aware enough as to how it all works.
            In my business, there aren’t even enough native born Americans to do the work in the border states, even if the wages were much higher. They have all left the trades in residential work, and there are very few left in commercial work. I am sure this is true in many other fields too.
            The only way to correct the problem is to kick out all the illegals, and limit those who enter legally who are not doctors, scientists, etc.

          • Hominid

            Why take a chance on a known huckster when you’ve got a serious candidate with essentially the same policy positions in Ted Cruz? You make no sense.

  • Boritz

    Why is Europe the very model of advanced sophistication for liberals until it comes to immigration. The attitudes and practices attributed to Trump and his followers goes double in Switzerland. They control their border and eject illegals. Think of Trumps’ followers not as feed store employees but rather as the cosmopolitan Euro-sophisticates they are.

    • Harry Heller

      Do the RINOs ever do anything else?

      • Ray Zacek

        I don’t use the term RINO. I have adopted Vichy Republican.

  • gubblerchechenova

    Funny. When the GOP staunchly supports the race-based nationalism of Zionism, American Interest is all for the GOP.

    Btw, this ‘fusion’ party. How has it been working out?

    Does any honest person really think Rand Paul can pull in the Detroit blacks or that Jeb Bush can win over the Hispanics?

    Btw, blacks are also sick of immigration and prefer Trump to the others.

    The fact is Democratic Party(dominated by Jewish elites) is explicitly anti-white.

    So, the GOP must cater to white concerns. Also, the real reason for the implosion of the GOP is because American Conservatism has been hijacked by Zionist neocons who think tribally but don’t allow it for whites.

    • JR

      It’s all the fault of the Jews???? DRINK!!!

  • mdmusterstone

    The Democrats don’t have any viable policies, the GOP hasn’t
    done a thing after winning the Congress and Senate except continuing to whine,
    “Look what they’re doing to us.”
    Looking at all the GOP candidates, I couldn’t name a single policy from
    any of them that would make one say, “Hey, that sounds really good and it
    looks like it could work.”

    I don’t see policies from Trump, what I see is a man, hey,
    white man, who punches back twice as hard against the myriad of bullies in this
    country. And after a good punching the
    bullies disappear to the astonishment of all those who hurried to render apologies
    for their shirts or their jokes, etc. I
    like it.

    • Hominid

      Ted CRUZ!!!

  • Harry Heller

    Could this column POSSIBLY be any dumber? “Pass Amnesty and “higher” (HIGHER??!) levels of legal immigration”. You Washingtonians REALLY, REALLY DO NOT GET IT, do you? We white Americans are not racist (for the most part) in the sense of wanting to bring harm or oppression to nonwhite citizens (the same cannot be said for the legions of unbelievably racist nonwhites who do want to harm whites – and often do). OTOH, we are under absolutely no moral obligation whatsoever to transform ourselves into a (persecuted) minority racial group IN OUR OWN COUNTRY through the artificial mechanism of mass immigration.

    This is about preserving traditional white-majority America, not merely about the lawlessness of unfettered illegal immigration. We Trump supporters want an END TO ALL NONWHITE IMMIGRATION, legal as well as illegal. Indeed, at a time of unprecedentedly low labor force participation, and incredibly high un- and underemployment, why, exactly, should we be taking in any additional immigrants at all? The propaganda that we “need” immigrants is more insulting than laughable – and we know it!

    We white Americans (and whites and historically discrete peoples everywhere) have a moral right to live with our own people and to be governed by them. It is a daily insult for a conservative white man like me to have to be ruled by not merely a Marxist tyrant – but a tyrant who is not even a member of my own tribe. Are these RINO fools, like this editorialist, even aware of what constituted the ancient idea of “freedom” – being ruled by members of your own “ethnie”?

    We whites have derived no benefits from the “Browning of America”. We pay for our own racial and ideo-political dispossession. And in this era of declining middle class expectations (read how this was predicted in Dr. Brent Nelson, AMERICA BALKANIZED (1994)), it is past time for whites to start looking out for OUR OWN interests. No one else will. Trump is perhaps the unwitting beneficiary of all this. TRUMP 2016!

    • SeenItAllBefore

      Come to CA where in fact whites are now statistically the minority. Will my grandchildren qualify for college under the affirmative action guidelines? (Crickets) No, didn’t think so.

      • V the K

        I find the biggest supporters of open borders are people who are most insulated from its effects. People like Bushes and the McCains don’t have to worry about losing a job or an educational opportunity to an illegal immigrant, and MS-13 doesn’t hang out in the neighborhoods where they live.

  • Brian Jacobs

    More evidence that it is time for a national divorce.

    States could choose which polity to join. Both could follow their own paths, and both could be happy.

    The wise path is to do this peacefully before it happens violently.

    • Eric377

      Who do you think might resort to violence?

  • brian_in_arizona

    The left is devoted to the concept of cultural diversity as a national goal. They celebrate diverse religions, languages, cultures. Moreover, they reject the long-standing concept that immigrants should assimilate into the dominant majority culture. Assimilation becomes a matter of choice, and government becomes an enabler of voluntary cultural separatism. Leftist elites see the majority American culture as morally bankrupt and oppressive to all minorities.

    Problem is, there are no examples of a successful nation based on the exaltation of diversity of language, religion, and culture, and there are many unsuccessful examples: Belgium, Bosnia, Serbia, Iraq, Ruanda, Sudan, Ukraine, India, Ottoman Turkey come to mind immediately. The US itself became a failed state due a cultural divide over slavery, requiring the worst war in our history to hold us together. The “diverse culture” of slavery was crushed by force of arms.

    This issue is much bigger than the future of the Republican Party.

    • SeenItAllBefore

      Here is a true story with subtle humor and illustrates how the whole diversity schstick goes down with one small sample of the cherished Hispanic cadre the Dems adore: One of our Mexican American workers (born here) took her child to her first day of kindergarten. I asked her if she liked her child’s teacher. She hesitated a moment, wrinkled her nose and said, “She’s Asian.” Oh the irony. Seems as though more than us whites be racist.

  • Pete

    Why should America be content with being turned into a 3rd World country?

    As politically incorrect as it might sound to the sensitive ears of Prof. Mead and the kiddies he is educating (brainwashing), most of the Mexican here belong back in Mexico. Ditto for the incoming muslims. Get enough of those people here, and the nature of the country will forever change …. and not for the better.

    • Hominid

      It’s just that simple.

  • danjarch

    The whole premise of this article is false. Parties like the National front, and Golden Dawn believe in nationalizing whole swaths of their respective economies. The failure of the right is that they to often refuse to hammer how the policies of the left, including the failure to enforce current immigration law leads to first economic stagnation then economic decline. This is ultimately what drives the anger over immigration. If everyone has more work then they can handle and the means to give their kids a better future, then they would be willing to allow more immigrants to join the party. Hence why the Germans, who’ve done a lot to reform their economy have been more willing to accept refugees.

    If the right want’s to win on this issue, then quit ignoring the anger people feel. Start hammering the growth message and most importantly. start enforcing the laws currently on the books. Only once some CEOs spend some time in jail, Only once deportations actually happen, only once the economy starts getting better, then do immigration reform.

    • Monte

      Assuming that by National Front, you mean the French Front National party, it is incorrect to say that it is committed to nationalization of the French economy. By the mid-1970s Jean-Marie Le Pen had effectively routed the Poujadist old guard in the party, with its anti-modernist economic philosophy. This victory was marked with the 1978 party program, which explicitly committed the FN to pro-capital, laissez-faire and anti-statist liberalism; in economic terms, the FN from that point was very close to Mrs. Thatcher’s views. Under Marine Le Pen, and in the current party program, the FN has moved closer toward the European center, espousing trade protection and support for small business, endorsing the status quo of a large state sector in health, education and welfare, but by no means renouncing market capitalism, economic liberalism, or the concept of private property.

  • Alex Ferrari

    the GOP messaging problem is all this talk of amnesty; it’s what makes the average conservative question republicans’ motives and will. everyone knows we cant possibly kick all of the illegals out, so just talk about the wall exclusively and let the rest sort itself out later.

  • HypnoToad

    Illegal immigration would not be an issue if there was economic growth. Unfortunately, the elites are exporting everything that looks like a middle-class job at the same time they are importing millions and millions of new workers. Elites of both parties: Jeb or Hillary, Reid or McConnell makes no difference. No one is one our side.

  • fastrackn1

    Trump in 2016!
    Let’s try someone who is not a career politician.
    How much more could he screw it up that the one in office now…a community organizer and senator for a year and a half…what the hell was America thinking…seriously?

    At least Trump has a lot of experience, and has accomplished something in his life….

  • sashamanda

    “fusionist ideological coalition with a shared belief in limited government” There is no coalition, and there has not been for some time. The elites in the GOP represent Wall Street and the Chamber of Commerce to such an extent that leadership allies with Democrats to pass massive spending bills, etc. And with control of both houses of Congress and the White House during the Bush years, the GOP vastly enlarged the debt while leaving the border porous. Will Trump deliver limited government and an immigration system that protects American workers and America itself? No one knows. What we do know beyond a shadow of a doubt is that neither the GOP nor the RNC will.

  • Bob Cooley

    “the danger is that the GOP, which got 88 percent of its votes from whites in 2012, gives up on creating a coalition bound together by ideology and instead resorts to ginning up resentment among aggrieved members of its base.”
    You know… like the Democrats. I guess the country is ok if it’s just one party ginning up anger and resentment to drive passion, but if both of them resort to it we’re doomed.

  • matimal

    Trump is pulling many democrats and independents, not just Republicans. It’s just as likely that Trump shows the way toward a populist/nationalist coalition that WOULD draw people who don’t think of themselves as “white” into a new political coalition. Trump’s campaign is a rejection of ethnic identity politics, not an embrace of it. To take Domenech’s advice is to accept the democratic narrative of America rather than to provide an alternative to it. The larger story here is that American elites have been universally infected with ‘ethnitis” and believe that race and ethnicity are deep, unchanging, and powerful truths rather that the shallow and fragile social constructions they really are.

  • Mike M

    I think Mead’s argument is proven (in a way) by the amazing fear-based reaction(s) in the comments below: (paraphrasing numerous ones) “We’ve got too many immigrants” “Immigrants are stealing our inheritance” “100 year moratorium on any more nonwhite immigrants” “This is about preserving traditional white-majority America” etc. Wow. Immigration has “ruined us (our state” “Mexicans belong back in Mexico.” Unbelievable.

    Dr Mead, are these the “legitimate” concerns about immigration that you think these Americans should be respected for? Fears expressed that we “real” Americans (the majority of whom probably came to this continent from poor immigrant families years ago, as mine did, and faced discrimination) are “losing” something? I don’t think these Americans realize some demographic and economic realities. 1) the declining birth rate amongst non-immigrants raises the importance of allowing more (not less) immigration to avoid serious population decline (witness Japan or parts of Europe. 2) Time and time and time again, economic studies show that countries benefit greatly from immigration (both legal and illegal), which probably scares the bejesus out of some commentators here (or they simply don’t believe it).

    In the end, there’s no way that reasonable arguments will mollify this particular segment of the US.

    • Hominid

      ‘Nother sip o Kool-Ade, Mikey?

      • Mike M

        No but if you can’t reply with a reasonably intelligent answer, why bother with the personal attacks? Oh wait, I think I answered my own question.

        • Hominid

          Why would I offer a “reasonably intelligent answer” to a bunch of gibberish?

          • Mike M

            Because a) you don’t what gibberish is, and b) you prefer intellectual masturbation over reasoned debate.

    • fastrackn1

      It’s not about ‘no immigrants’, it’s about the ‘right’ immigrants…not just allowing mass immigration by anyone. America’s needs have changed in the last 100+ years, so the ways of allowing everyone’s ‘huddled masses’ to come here doesn’t benefit us in the same way it had in the past.

      There was a time when immigrants respected America. They knew that it was (and still is) the greatest civilization ever constructed in the history of mankind.
      When my Great Grandparents came here from Norway in the 1880’s they forgot their culture and adapted the American culture. My Grandmother used to tell me that her parents never spoke Norwegian in the house, and refused to teach it to their children. My Grandparents knew nothing about Norway, and didn’t care about it.
      Now people live here for years and can barely speak English, want to wave their flag here, and force Americans to accept their cultures through multi-culturalism, laws, and other liberal agenda….and you wonder why there is animosity towards immigrants here…seriously?

      • Mike M

        I see your point. But how exactly do we determine the “right” immigrants? What’s the metric being used? In the past, we judged immigrants by their eyes, their colour, their religion — hell, we still do! As a veteran (and former small business owner), I’ve encountered and worked with many immigrants and children of them, and the vast majority were relieved to have an opportunity to start over again. Extremely few — if any — of them “force” American’s to accept their cultures. They are proud of their heritage and rightly so. You can honour the past and present together. I’m proud to live in a country where we take ALL of the huddled masses regardless.

        • fastrackn1

          “Right” meaning highly skilled doctors, scientists, chemists, etc. that can bring real benefit to America, not low skilled labor and those types, which America can’t even supply enough jobs for as it is now.
          100+ years ago we just needed to populate the country, but our needs have changed and also have become much more sophisticated since then.

          Actually we are being forced to accept cultures by laws and also the Liberal agenda that promotes and continuously pushes multi-culturalism. All this started because of immigrants who had begun a push for it many years back. If “they are proud of their heritage”, then why don’t they stay in their screwed up country and fix it instead of running away from it? Besides, how can anyone be ‘proud’ of a heritage that has created a 3rd-world country?…most of which are dangerous and barely livable. I have traveled extensively to many 3rd-world countries over the years because I prefer to experience those places instead of places like Europe or other vacation hot spots (also my wife is from Kenya), and I can tell you from personal experience that there is nothing to be ‘proud of’ there in those countries.

          As a home builder in Texas, I also work with mostly immigrants (Hispanics). Most have not adapted here and don’t even speak any English. Their 3rd-world culture that they have brought here is nothing but a filthy mess…as it is in their countries south of the border.
          They have also pushed out all of the native born labor because they work for next-to-nothing wages. It’s all nothing but a big mess….

  • Mark Hamilton

    “But the first, most indispensable steps must be to enforce the nation’s immigration laws and secure the borders.”

    Securing the border and then dealing with those that are already here has been the de facto GOP position on immigration for a long time. The problem is that it has just been lip service as the big money and established interests that run the GOP favors the perpetuation of the status quo. Europe may well be our future and the Chamber of Commerce types are fine with that. Selling our birthright as Americans for another decade of profits on the backs of exploited foreign labor and the American taxpayer.

    That’s the problem and the GOP base (and some Reagan Democrats it would appear) have figured it out.

  • bscook111

    It may be necessary for the marines to go again to Veracruz to secure the border. The Mexican government is much like the Saudis. Ply America with platitudes but behave incorrigibly to our detriment. Trump is more right than wrong unfortunately. Border security has to be first, WHATEVER IT TAKES!

  • Mike Green

    Well said qet! the fact is that any attempt to do anything other than completely ignore illegal immigration is painted as racism, or its little brother “white identity politics”. it is the liberal left’s (and the just plain uninformed) reaction to reasonable plans or discussion to stop
    illegal immigration. I think the Republicans should approach the problem this way: 1, immediately announce that the party is VERY pro LEGAL immigration. suggest expanding the number of visas and citizenships offered yearly, make sure that the opportunities are spread around the world to continually increase diversity. 2. get solidly behind Trump’s policy of returning people to their homes if they are here illegally. its a law, and I makes a mockery of both our ancestors who came here legally and our integrity as a country to do otherwise.
    3. declare an iron clad immigration reform policy of always quickly and humanely returning to their homes anyone who enters the country illegally or over stays illegally. 100%. 4. charge the country of origin a very stiff fine for failure to enforce THEIR sides of the border, after all the borders have TWO sides, why is it up to us to bear the costs alone? 5. use the millions to build the wall, invest in new technology and personnel to close the border

  • Gerard Van Kessel

    Immigration is neither good nor bad. It all depends on the kind of immigration. Immigrants migrate because they believe it will be good for them. The question is whether it is also good for the country. And that depends. It depends on the needs and wants of the country. People with needed skills are good for the country because they are an economic benefit. People who end up on welfare and those who enter into criminality hurt the country and those who reside in it. The problem for the U.S. is that as many people enter illegally as legally and the Government has absolutely no say in whether their entry and stay is to the benefit of the country. When the country is not involved in the decision to grant entry and stay then the country can hardly be surprised that the needs and wants of the two sides may be at odds. To me, and I have had a life time’s experience with the issue, determine what the country wants and then ensure that those who want to come are allowed in but who the country does not want and need are kept out or, if they get in and stay, are removed. Why that is a radical solution is beyond me. It is what was traditionally the case and was one of the bases of the the strength and prestige of the U.S. We cannot say that any longer.

    • brian_in_arizona

      Your common sense proposal flies in the face of liberal policies that demand that the US first and foremost do what is good for the world. In their view, if what is good for the world is not good for the US, then it serves us right for the injustices we have done to “people of color” through slavery, land grabs from Mexico, murder of Native Americans, etc.

  • JTinNC

    “Resorts to ginning up resentment among aggrieved members of its base.” Describes the Left and their tactics for the last 70 years. I definitely dont want that to happen to the Right.

  • JSirko

    This is just so stupid, Trumps message is about enforcing the law not white identify politics. I can’t believe how stupid some writers are.

    • brian_in_arizona

      The leadership of the black community keeps a low profile on the issue of illegal immigration. One of the great fears of Democratic strategists is an uprising within the black electorate against illegal immigrants from Latin America who have displaced blacks both in the work force and in some urban housing markets.

      Great effort is being made by liberals to conflate the challenges faced by new Hispanic immigrants with the challenges faced by American-born blacks who have lived in the US for 3+ centuries. I wonder how long this will work.

      • Suzyqpie

        The strategy will work as long a black leadership and the media continue to ignore this fact:
        “The data is going to indicate sadly that when the Obama administration is over, black people will have lost ground in every single leading economic indicator category. For that Pres 0bama should be held accountable,” quote Tavis Smiley

  • CityDweller71

    Fuck off, traitorous A.I.!!

  • Hollif50

    Clue: We are not anti-immigrant or anti-immigration… We are pro “rule of law” and anti “cutting” the immigration line in front of people who have stood in line to become citizens of this country for years… We are anti squatting; and this in spite of all the Leftie hype and propaganda about how these people “work hard”, have families, and “do jobs Americans won’t do”.. The argument falls on deaf ears – for we all know it’s just another lie in an endless string of lies from the Left……. The vast majority of us wouldn’t allow some random family to move into our house without permission. Why would the country allow random illegal aliens to do that to our land ? Deport all the illegals and let them take their underage anchor babies with them. They can come back, if they so chose, when they’re 18 years old…

  • ErikEssig

    WRM is a perceptive guy and Domenech’s piece was generally thoughtful, but I think they both miss the boat on Trump, at least as it concerns blacks and hispanics. Trump will attract more black votes than any other Republican candidate and he’s likely to do comparatively well with hispanics too. The alpha male will get votes that beta Jeb will never get. It’s not really about white identity politics.

  • forwhatitsworth

    Several points are missed by both articles.

    First and foremost, if immigration were the only thing the Federal Government has screwed up that would be one thing. But DC is so messed up and is so out of touch that the immigration issues is just the tip of iceberg.

    Secondly, most people don’t look at issues the way the media does. Most people don’t care about demographics, most just want the country to do better, to maximize it’s potential. We want the US to succeed, we want everyone to succeed. That means government can’t force outcomes, the crème has to rise naturally. Competition creates the best in all of us, government picking winners and losers doesn’t work.

    Third, most people have a natural distrust of government and the amount angst or distrust depends on which side of the government’s winner/loser decisions you fall on. And that has nothing to do with demographics and all to do with government picking winners and losers.

    Lastly, tolerance is a double edged sword (i.e. reverse discrimination). We are becoming more tolerant, but that tolerance comes with a cost. We are evolving and anger by some is a natural outcome. These are complicated issues that can’t be explained with pure demographics. These issues will take some time and require patience and understanding. Unfortunately as a society we don’t have enough and the media has even less.

  • Hotscot

    I’m glad I’ve discovered this forum of educated commenters.

    I’m from Scotland. A legal immigrant and now naturalized citizen.
    I first visited California many decades ago and now? To cut a long story short many parts of SoCal resemble Tijuana.
    Tax rates are horrendous. I’m a business owner and high tax payer.
    It’s steadily becoming a third world country
    I’ve had it with the idiotic State government passing laws that pander solely to illegals.

    This is not what I signed up for. planning to get out of here in 8 months…heading to the Northeast.

    And regarding identity politics..this place is full of ‘immigrant rights activists’ who only represent Hispanic/Latino.
    I certainly never had anyone offering to represent me.

  • Daemonocracy

    So this is the new narrative of the anti Trump crowd, that Trump voters and white working class in general, are racist? Oh wait, that’s what these people always thought: accusing people who want to protect their jobs of being racist is their only play.

  • martingale

    Before we engage in comprehensive immigration reform by legislation, there are three things that can be done right now by executive order that would help the self appointed elites committed to solving this problem understand its dimensions:

    1.) Institute a large (at least 25,000 or so) H1B visa program for budding third world journalists, so that they might pursue their dreams in the US, while helping our news organizations deal with the crippling shortage of skilled journalists in this country.
    2.) House all immigrant families given emergency refugee status in a convenient location like Martha’s Vineyard (Europeans might consider a similarly convenient location for their “refugee” population, such as Davos or, just to keep it in the EU, Brussels).
    3.) Enroll all refugee children from Central America in our best private schools at government expense, say; Sidwell Friends or St. Albans in D.C., Dalton or Fieldston in NYC, or, since money is no object, Exeter or Andover in New England.

  • Fleshman

    “It could and probably should involve higher levels of legal immigration than we have right now and some form of amnesty. But the first, most indispensable steps must be to enforce the nation’s immigration laws and secure the borders.”

    You don’t get it at all. The rates of immigration are already too high and the US has already imported quite enough of the rest of the worlds poverty! We need a moratorium for several decades in my view. Immigration policy needs to be based on the interests of US workers…not “job creators”.

  • Warren_28

    California is where the rest of the country is headed. How well is the principle of “limited-government” selling to the immigrants there?

  • bluesdoc70

    You assume that the Republican party establishment cares more about national cohesion than it does about supplying cheap labor to its’ corporate owners.

    • Suzyqpie

      No one has done a better job of suppling cheap labor to the Donor Class than Pres Obama….

  • DFCtomm

    You know how you can tell an amnesty shill? They ask for legislation, but enforcement legislation is already there. It was put in after the 86 amnesty. it’s not perfect, but it’s more than good enough to start. The only reason to demand legislation is to get another amnesty.

  • Suzyqpie

    The people that we elected to represent us allow Mexico, et al, to export their poorest and least educated constituency to us, US. Does WDC think that the American taxpayers can provide for anyone from anywhere in any number who can find their way to our shores. The U.S. has become the repository for the world’s poor. It is fiscal insanity.

  • CountMahdrof

    White represent 77% of the population. How is it even possible that “whites are becoming just one ethnic group among many” as the author proclaims, when all other minorities combined only equal less than a quarter of the population?

  • Bunky

    Many times Mead’s articles makes sense.
    This is not one of those times.

  • bittman

    The part of Trump’s immigration plan that I like best deals more with national security and national sovereignty than with immigration — i.e., BUILD THE FENCE FIRST.

  • Gregson14

    The Democrats and Progressives have been constructing their voter messages and constituencies for the last 50 years through the overt use of Identity Politics. Where has Mr. Mead been for the last half century!…

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service