|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Jul 25, 2013 12:31:21 GMT
I'm not sure of how many in the United States are aware of the fact that our immigration laws today are founded upon limiting non-WASP (White Anglo Saxon Protestant) immigration.Since the creation of the United States the "White Anglo Saxon Protestants" have always maintained control of our government and while we were founded as a sectarian nation where "all men are created equal" and preferential treatment based of race, religion, ethnic heritage, social status, or other invidious criteria was unacceptable but there has always been "WASP Nationalism" where many believed that the United States should be a WASP nation. Non-WASP individuals have always been persecuted in the United State starting with slavery of African-Americans, the oppression of the Native-American tribes, the opposition to Chinese immigration that fundamentally started with the California gold rush, the opposition to Irish Catholics immigration during the Irish potato famine, etc. where they were historically consider to be undesirables by the WASP Nationalists. I remember when Kennedy was running for office that perhaps the primary objection was that he was a Catholic.
We can also go back historically where natural born citizenship was established exclusively by State laws until the 14th Amendment enumerated the criteria for natural born citizenship based upon jus soli (that had always been the criteria but not previously enumerated) and even then this was ignored by state laws until the Supreme Court decision in the United States v Kim Wong Ark where California law did not recognize his natural born citizenship even though he was born in California (when it was a state just like Obama being born in Hawaii when it was a state). Kim Wong Ark was not a WASP and California, under state law, had denied him his Inalienable Right of Citizenship based upon jus soli as enumerated in the 14th Amendment. Our first federal immigration laws, and upon which today's immigration laws are based, originated after WW I and were supported by the KKK, a WASP Nationalist organization that was also the pre-eminent terrorist organization in the United States, when it was at the height of it's political power. A better understanding of this can be obtained by reading about the Immigration Act of 1924.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924I suggest reading the entire Wikipedia summary because, for example, while it reduced British immigration by 14% that were WASP's it reduced Italian immigration by 90% because they were Roman Catholics. As noted the law was based upon WASP racism and Madison Grant's "The Passing of the Great Race" was a WASP Nationalism book that was highly influential in the passage of the law.Today when we address current US immigration laws the identical criteria of "quotas" to limit non-WASP immigration are in place. A WASP from Great Britain has virtually no obstacles if they want to immigrate to the United States but thousands of medical doctors from India, many trained in US universities, are being blocked from immigration because they're not WASP's. Hispanics from Mexico, Central and South America are routinely blocked from immigration to the United State even though we have millions of jobs that are going unfilled because only these immigrant will work for the low wages performing the hard physical labor associated with these jobs because they aren't WASP's.
While the "quotas" have changed the underlying purpose of today's immigration laws are to block non-WASP immigration based upon WASP Nationalism which is racism pure and simple. People try to rationalize this racism by falsely claiming that these immigrants come here for the welfare benefits but that's simply a cover for the racism behind the laws. A poor person from Great Britain isn't denied immigration but a poor Mexican is. That is an undeniable fact that is beyond dispute.
In a very real sense we're supporting the agenda of the KKK, Stormfront and the White Nationalist hate groups by supporting the current immigration laws of America. When are Americans going to become informed and understand that racism is not acceptable and by supporting our immigration law of today they're actively endorsing racism in the United States. We need to stop rationalizing racism in the laws of the United States.
I will end with one final citation from Thomas Jefferson related to immigration. Thomas Jefferson believed that the Person had the Right of Expatriation which is the Right of the Person to leave their native country and immigrate to another country. It is a Right of Liberty of the Person to do this and no country should deny the Liberty of the Person in relocating from one nation to another. Immigration is an Inalienable Right of the Person that our immigration laws in the United States violate today.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Jul 28, 2013 17:33:38 GMT
There's a huge flaw in your claims however.  Since 1965, the major source of immigration to the United States has shifted from Europe to Latin America and Asia, reversing the trend since the founding of the nation. According to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), Europe accounted for 50 percent of U.S. immigration during the decade fiscal years 1955 to 1964, followed by North America at 35 percent, and Asia at eight percent. In fiscal year 1988, Asia was highest at 41 percent, followed by North America at 39 percent , and Europe at 10 percent. In order, the countries exceeding 20,000 immigrants in fiscal year 1988 were Mexico, the Philippines, Haiti, Korea, India, mainland China, the Dominican Republic, Vietnam, and Jamaica. ( Please examine the chart to see the huge increase in immigration coming from these countries since that time period.) And as you can plainly see, after that time period it was a Democrat president and famous Democrat Senator who made changes in both our legal and illegal immigration policies. Be sure and read what Senator Barbar Jordan said below. "The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA), enacted in 1996, resulted from the process of deliberating on the recommendations of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform established by President Clinton and the Congress to examine both legal and illegal immigration issues. The Commission was chaired until her untimely death in 1996 by The Hon. Barbara C. Jordan who had served in the U.S. House of Representatives (D-TX) 1973-79, and was a professor at the Univ. of Texas-Austin 1979-96. The Commission's members included distinguished experts in immigration law and history and others with experience in national politics and business. After a long and arduous effort to develop bipartisan legislation dealing with both reform of legal and illegal immigration, Congress narrowed its focus on illegal immigration provisions with a promise by many that they would return soon to the effort to reform legal immigration. "Credibility in immigration policy can be summed up in one sentence: Those who should get in, get in; those who should be kept out, are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave...For the system to be credible, people actually have to be deported at the end of the process."
(Barbara Jordan, February 24, 1995 Testimony to House Immigration Subcommittee)
Now.....are you going to tell us that Senator Jordan who was black and Bill Clinton, the first black president were racists??? "The provisions of IIRAIRA were aimed at adopting stronger penalties against illegal immigration, streamlining the deportation (removal) process by curtailing the never-ending legal appeal process that was used by immigration lawyers to keep their clients in the United States until they found a sympathetic judge who would grand suspension of deportation (cancellation of removal). Other toughening provisions adopted in the same year aimed at curbing the ability of terrorists to use the immigration process to enter and operate in the United States and to restrict the use of public welfare benefits by new immigrants contrary to the intent of the immigration law." "For our immigration policy to make sense, it is necessary to make distinctions between those who obey the law, and those who violate it." (Barbara Jordan, address to United We Stand, America Conference, Dallas, TX, August 12, 1995) www.fairus.org/facts/us_laws |
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Jul 29, 2013 0:40:50 GMT
All well and good mentioning recent immigration but this ignores the fact that basically for the first 150 years of the United States there were no federal restrictions on immigration and the first immigration restrictions, and every immigration restriction since then, have been based upon racism in restricting non-WASP immigration. By way of example if the "quota" for the UK is filled a British subject can still easily by-pass the quota today.
That is an undeniable fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Jul 29, 2013 0:54:17 GMT
Baloney! Some people see racism everywhere they look. We wouldn't be bringing in Asians and people from the Americas at the rate we are...(see the chart)....IF we were a racist nation, that you seem to insist we are. And a lot of our immigration policies of the past were based on bringing over extended 'families' of those already here, so that there is family or someone who could support them until they got started over here. That still goes on today.
Geez. Try being proud of your country once in a while....instead of always trying to knock it down.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Jul 29, 2013 10:21:28 GMT
I actually believe in the ideals upon which America was founded. Madison, Washington, and Jefferson all believe in open immigration for those that would come to the United States for peaceful purposes. Jefferson expressed the belief that immigration from one nation to another was an inalienable Right of the Person.
Need I cite Washington and Madison as well? The Right to Immigrate to the United States is embodied in the US Constitution were it mandates the following responsibility to our legislature:
This is not a mandate to control immigration but instead to ensure that all immigrants are provided the same "rules" under the law to become naturalized citizens of the United States. In truth the US Constitution delegates no role to Congress to control immigration at all.
"Conservatives" that believe that the US government should not be assuming roles that are not enumerated in the US Constitution should be the first to oppose immigration laws as the US Constitution does not enumerate any "power" to Congress to limit immigration. It is political hypocrisy to oppose federal programs such as Federal Aid to Education or "Obamacare" because the US Constitution doesn't enumerate this power to Congress and then support immigration laws where the US Constitution doesn't enumerate this power to Congress either.
I'm also not one to ignore history. We know for a fact that the first federal immigration laws in the 1920's were aimed at limiting Catholic immigration from Eastern Europe and were highly supported by the KKK, a terrorist organization, that opposes immigration. The KKK is a White Anglo Saxon Protestant organization advocating White Nationalism. While the KKK has waned in political power from what had in the 1920's where it literally controlled the Southern States it has still managed to continue it's advocacy of White Nationalism that many so-called conservatives have adopted in practice today.
We should also look at our history of "immigration reform" which was last done in 1986 under President Reagan. Many correctly state that this reform failed and the reasons are quite obvious.
Yes, the 1986 law failed but it wasn't because of the amnesty but instead because of the provisions in the law. Of the roughly 5 million "illegal" immigrants only about 2.6 million filed for and received "amnesty" while about 2 million either didn't qualify because they'd immigrated after 1982 or simply didn't know that they could file for amnesty. When we look at the 11 million estimated "illegal" immigrants today about 2 million of those were holdovers from the 1986 Immigration Reform Act.
But the law also failed for a much more fundamental reason. It failed to allow legal immigration to fill the job openings for immigrant labor.
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/30/in-1986-congress-tried-to-solve-immigration-why-didnt-it-work/
The 11 million "illegal" immigrants that we have in the United States came here for the work (or to be with a working family member or were born here). This right-wing propaganda that they came here for the welfare benefits is absolute poppycock. They came here because employers needed them. They are willing to work for low wages at hard labor in jobs that Americans don't want. They didn't come here for a handout, they came here to work, and today there are still millions of unfilled jobs waiting for immigrant labor. In agriculture alone about 25% of our crops go unharvested because there's no one to harvest them. Millions of jobs for domestic labor and for manual labor are unfilled today because these jobs have traditionally been done by immigrant labor. The housing market has sprung back to life but new home construction companies are turning down about 10% of the jobs because the "illegal" immigrants that used to build homes returned to Mexico after the housing crisis hit in 2008. Americans that worked in this industry have moved on to new careers and won't be coming back so new home are not being built.
Reagan's 1986 Immigration Reform Act failed because it ignored the Law of Supply and Demand for Labor. If there is a "demand" then "supply" will attempt to fill that demand. It will do so legally if possible but if it is illegal then a black market will fill that demand. The "illegal" immigrant problem is a simply matter of Supply and Demand where the "black market" in labor is filling a demand for labor in the United States that cannot be met legally under our immigration laws.
And whether the "right wing" realizes it or not our immigration restrictions follow the same pattern today that the KKK promoted in the 1920's. The laws target non-WASP's whether we look at the common laborer from Mexico or the medical doctor from India that are being prohibited from immigrating to the United States today because of "immigration laws" that violate an inalienable Right of the Person according to the founders of America like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington. These are non-WASP's and those are the one's that our immigration laws have historically restricted and continue to restrict from coming to America.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daisy on Jul 29, 2013 12:46:00 GMT
Explain, if we discriminate against non WASPs where do the Haitians fit into this plan. It would appear they out number WASPs. Anything that is allowed is not discrimination. It may appear to be discrimination but our immigrants from non whites are larger than WASPs. As much as people would like to scream racial discrimination it won't stand up. Below is one example of non-whites with a growing population.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Jul 29, 2013 13:14:49 GMT
Explain, if we discriminate against non WASPs where do the Haitians fit into this plan. Can someone seriously bring up Haiti? There are more "illegal" Mexican immigrants that are working or family members of workers in the United States (over 11 million) than the entire population of Haiti (about 9 million). We can also note that Haitians are NOT Hispanic. Demographically Haiti is 95% black/mulatto and 5% white. Obviously if our immigration policies are "anti-Hispanic" (which they currently are) then Haitians don't fall into that category. Our immigration laws, since the 1920's, have always been selectively discriminatory which is why "Catholics" were targeted in the 1920's just like Hispanics are target today. The only group that hasn't been "targeted" are WASP's so take off the rose colored glasses and see what's actually going on as opposed to trying to rationalize it or explain it away. Our current immigration laws are based upon the anti-WASP political agenda of the KKK that, at the height of their political power, were able to institute during the 1920's. The immigration laws selectively discriminate based upon race, religion, ethnic heritage, national origin, and/or other invidious criteria. That is an indisputable fact of history. |
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Jul 29, 2013 13:17:52 GMT
It is not true that our Immigration laws favor whites. One only has to examine the chart I provided above to see that it has NOT been that way since at least the 1960's. Every country has immigration laws; some much more stringent than our own. Mexico, for example. We couldn't do in Mexico, what many of them do in our country....which is just walk over the border, live and get a job. I'm all for expanding of legal immigration numbers whenever it is deemed necessary. However, when our country is doing so poorly economically, and unemployment numbers are so high, this might not be the best time to do so. We are not building new homes like we once were. We are not expanding our communities like we once were. nd we have more and more of our population going on the federal govt' dole. And we have a liberal administration to thank for NOT turning this thing around as he promised....SIX year ago!!
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Jul 29, 2013 13:31:50 GMT
"The Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT90) was signed into law as P.L. 101-649 by President Bush on November 29, 1990. It constituted a major revision of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which remained the basic immigration law. Its primary focus was the numerical limits and preference system regulating permanent legal immigration. Besides legal immigration, the eight-title Act dealt with many other aspects of immigration law ranging from nonimmigrants to criminal aliens to naturalization.
The legal immigration changes included an increase in total immigration under an overall flexible cap, an increase in annual employment-based immigration from 54,000 to 140,000, and a permanent provision for the admission of "diversity immigrants" from "underrepresented" countries. The new system provided for a permanent annual level of approximately 700,000 during fiscal years 1992 through 1994. Refugees were the only major group of aliens not included. The Act established a three-track preference system for family-sponsored, employment-based, and diversity immigrants. Additionally, the Act significantly amended the work-related nonimmigrant categories for temporary admission."
A permanent provision for the admission of "Diversity immigrants and "underrepresented countries." And that, my friend, was done by a Republican president! He also increased total immigration numbers. And THAT is an UNDISPUTED FACT!!
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Jul 29, 2013 13:49:02 GMT
It is not true that our Immigration laws favor whites. One only has to examine the chart I provided above to see that it has NOT been that way since at least the 1960's. Every country has immigration laws; some much more stringent than our own. Mexico, for example. We couldn't do in Mexico, what many of them do in our country....which is just walk over the border, live and get a job. I'm all for expanding of legal immigration numbers whenever it is deemed necessary. However, when our country is doing so poorly economically, and unemployment numbers are so high, this might not be the best time to do so. We are not building new homes like we once were. We are not expanding our communities like we once were. nd we have more and more of our population going on the federal govt' dole. And we have a liberal administration to thank for NOT turning this thing around as he promised....SIX year ago!!
To address a single point presented the housing industry is back but the problem is not enough workers anymore.
jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/05/10/construction-industry-shortage-skilled-workers/
American new home construction workers moved on to new careers during the housing crisis and they're not going back into construction. Many of the Mexicans that also contributed to new home construction went back to Mexico and, even if they wanted, they can't come back to the United States because of the "Mexican Quota" so new homes that could be built, helping to fuel the economic recovery, simply aren't being built. Of course Republicans don't want the economy to recover because that would make Obama look good so obviously they oppose this immigration.
It is ironic that Republicans are in bed with the Unions when it comes to immigration. Both make BS statements that Mexican immigrants will take American jobs and that is false. Americans won't work at the jobs that most Mexican immigrants fill. By way of example 30 years ago or so Americans picked apples in Yakima WA. Most were American teenagers earning money for college or other purposes during the relatively short harvest season. Today an American teenager couldn't be forced to pick apples if we held a gun on them. "Mommy and Daddy" pay for college so why should the kid work? Or they just get a student loan that leaves them deep in debt for a college degree that is, in many cases, worthless once they get it.
How many "Americans" aspire to be domestic labor? This work that was traditionally left for African-American women but they've stopped doing it because it really was racially degrading so Hispanic immigrant women filled these positions. There were always more jobs than available workers and so many were "illegal" immigrants because the demand for labor existed. There would be more of these jobs if there wasn't limitations on immigration.
Here is the bottom line. Immigrant workers don't take jobs away from Americans but instead fill jobs where there aren't enough American workers or where Americans simply won't do the work for the wages. If we had open immigration for employment purposes it would actually result in millions of new jobs because a "lack of labor" is preventing these jobs from being created.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daisy on Jul 29, 2013 14:26:34 GMT
Explain, if we discriminate against non WASPs where do the Haitians fit into this plan. Can someone seriously bring up Haiti? There are more "illegal" Mexican immigrants that are working or family members of workers in the United States (over 11 million) than the entire population of Haiti (about 9 million). We can also note that Haitians are NOT Hispanic. Demographically Haiti is 95% black/mulatto and 5% white. Obviously if our immigration policies are "anti-Hispanic" (which they currently are) then Haitians don't fall into that category. Our immigration laws, since the 1920's, have always been selectively discriminatory which is why "Catholics" were targeted in the 1920's just like Hispanics are target today. The only group that hasn't been "targeted" are WASP's so take off the rose colored glasses and see what's actually going on as opposed to trying to rationalize it or explain it away. Our current immigration laws are based upon the anti-WASP political agenda of the KKK that, at the height of their political power, were able to institute during the 1920's. The immigration laws selectively discriminate based upon race, religion, ethnic heritage, national origin, and/or other invidious criteria. That is an indisputable fact of history. Seriously how can you exclude them because their immigration is greater than theAnglo's in the report I submitted. |
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Jul 29, 2013 16:05:19 GMT
It is not true that our Immigration laws favor whites. One only has to examine the chart I provided above to see that it has NOT been that way since at least the 1960's. Every country has immigration laws; some much more stringent than our own. Mexico, for example. We couldn't do in Mexico, what many of them do in our country....which is just walk over the border, live and get a job. I'm all for expanding of legal immigration numbers whenever it is deemed necessary. However, when our country is doing so poorly economically, and unemployment numbers are so high, this might not be the best time to do so. We are not building new homes like we once were. We are not expanding our communities like we once were. nd we have more and more of our population going on the federal govt' dole. And we have a liberal administration to thank for NOT turning this thing around as he promised....SIX year ago!!
To address a single point presented the housing industry is back but the problem is not enough workers anymore.
jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/05/10/construction-industry-shortage-skilled-workers/
American new home construction workers moved on to new careers during the housing crisis and they're not going back into construction. Many of the Mexicans that also contributed to new home construction went back to Mexico and, even if they wanted, they can't come back to the United States because of the "Mexican Quota" so new homes that could be built, helping to fuel the economic recovery, simply aren't being built. Of course Republicans don't want the economy to recover because that would make Obama look good so obviously they oppose this immigration.
It is ironic that Republicans are in bed with the Unions when it comes to immigration. Both make BS statements that Mexican immigrants will take American jobs and that is false. Americans won't work at the jobs that most Mexican immigrants fill. By way of example 30 years ago or so Americans picked apples in Yakima WA. Most were American teenagers earning money for college or other purposes during the relatively short harvest season. Today an American teenager couldn't be forced to pick apples if we held a gun on them. "Mommy and Daddy" pay for college so why should the kid work? Or they just get a student loan that leaves them deep in debt for a college degree that is, in many cases, worthless once they get it.
How many "Americans" aspire to be domestic labor? This work that was traditionally left for African-American women but they've stopped doing it because it really was racially degrading so Hispanic immigrant women filled these positions. There were always more jobs than available workers and so many were "illegal" immigrants because the demand for labor existed. There would be more of these jobs if there wasn't limitations on immigration.
Here is the bottom line. Immigrant workers don't take jobs away from Americans but instead fill jobs where there aren't enough American workers or where Americans simply won't do the work for the wages. If we had open immigration for employment purposes it would actually result in millions of new jobs because a "lack of labor" is preventing these jobs from being created.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Jul 29, 2013 17:28:51 GMT
Can someone seriously bring up Haiti? There are more "illegal" Mexican immigrants that are working or family members of workers in the United States (over 11 million) than the entire population of Haiti (about 9 million). We can also note that Haitians are NOT Hispanic. Demographically Haiti is 95% black/mulatto and 5% white. Obviously if our immigration policies are "anti-Hispanic" (which they currently are) then Haitians don't fall into that category. Our immigration laws, since the 1920's, have always been selectively discriminatory which is why "Catholics" were targeted in the 1920's just like Hispanics are target today. The only group that hasn't been "targeted" are WASP's so take off the rose colored glasses and see what's actually going on as opposed to trying to rationalize it or explain it away. Our current immigration laws are based upon the anti-WASP political agenda of the KKK that, at the height of their political power, were able to institute during the 1920's. The immigration laws selectively discriminate based upon race, religion, ethnic heritage, national origin, and/or other invidious criteria. That is an indisputable fact of history. Seriously how can you exclude them because their immigration is greater than theAnglo's in the report I submitted. Today's immigration limitations are predominately targeting Hispanic and Muslim immigration and are not targeting blacks which is what Haitians predominately represent. |
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Jul 29, 2013 17:56:20 GMT
So.....if as you claim.... zero net "illegal" immigration since 2009 under the Obama administration......then why aren't you calling him and his administration "racists" as you surely would be doing if this were a Republican administration?
I've stated that the immigration laws reflect discrimination against non-WASP that had their roots with the KKK and have since been adopted by White Nationalists in America today. They're not just racial but also based upon religious criteria such as opposition to Jews, Muslims and Catholics immigrating to the United States. We can, for example, reflect on history when in 1939 Jewish refugees from the Nazis on the MS St Louis were denied asylum by the United States government that eventually forced them to return to Germany. From what I understand about 1/2 of them later died in the Holocaust. We can also note that several other countries refused their entry including Cuba where these people had purchased legal immigration papers but Cuba changed it's immigration rules after the immigration papers had been issued. What is sad is that the United States refused political refugees sanctuary at the time predominately because they were Eastern European Jews (i.e. non-WASP's).
So there is plenty of blame to go around but politically all of that blame rests with the Democrats and Republicans that have controlled the immigration laws in the United States that historically have limited non-WASP immigration and that embraces the "White Nationalist" agenda of groups like the KKK.
It's real easy to not be associated with those that embrace the White Nationalist agenda by opposing limitations on immigration that restricts the peaceful immigration for legitimate purposes such as labor, for family members, retirement, and for political asylum. Try embracing the views of Thomas Jefferson that believed that ALL People had an Inalienable Right to leave their country of birth and relocate to another country for legitimate and peaceful purposes which was also supported by James Madison and George Washington.
As I noted for about 150 years we had no immigration laws so let's abolish them. Let us only be concerned with those that would come to the United States for nefarious criminal purposes as opposed to limiting immigration for those that would come here to make the United States their home where they can work and live in freedom.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Jul 29, 2013 19:27:52 GMT
Really? Seriously? You want to just simply abolish immigration laws? Just let everyone come in who wants to? What country does that? I can tell you that Mexico doesn't.
You keep claiming we are discriminating against Mexicans and Muslims. Again....look at the chart I provided above. I don't think you even looked. What it says is that the VAST majority of immigrants coming in today are from the "Americas." That would include Mexico and Centra and South America.....Mexico, Guatemale and El Salvador. Hispanics.
As far as Muslims go.....the terrorists would LOVE your proposal to just let them all come in....no questions asked.
|
|
