In reaffirming the rule of law and giving local support to national sovereignty, Arizona has taken a bold, perhaps dangerous step. How it will end, I do not know. Much depends on the will of the electorate and the political class that is supposed to represent the people. The predictable backlash from the Latino community and from anti-white minority ward-heelers like our once beloved President is already testing the political will of the state’s leaders.
How would this issue look, when viewed from the perspective of the Realpolitik, whose rules are given below? First off, any honest man would begin by repudiating the word “Latino.” Leave such dishonest language to the Unzes and the dunces. There is not such thing as a Latino–unless we mean someone who speaks Latin–or Hispanic, unless we are referring to people from Spain. There is no Latino or Hispanic race or culture, only a bewildering variety of races, ethnicities, and cultural traditions. A mulatto Mexico has less in common with a Germano-Hispanic Chilean than I do with the Crips and the Bloods.
This is not a trivial or irrelevant fact. When Mexican-Americans use such dishonest terms (terms many of them ridicule with T-shirts and bumper stickers that read “Mexican–and Proud of It) they are proclaiming the fact that their first allegiance is not to their country but to their ethnic group. And, when Mexican-American Republicans threaten to leave the GOP, on the grounds that it thinks more of the United States than an anti-American ethnic minority, they are committing a kind of moral treason against the nation whose citizenship they claim and whose kindness they enjoy.
Secondly, I am beginning to like the idea of boycotting Arizona. But the most effective boycott should be launched, not from California but from California’s mother-country. Imagine if Mexico boycotted Arizona! It might mean no toxic vegetables shipped across the border, no homicidal drivers behind the wheel of trucks that would not pass the safety or environmental legislation of the worst state in the Union. And, what if they quit shipping in Mexicans? Think of all those empty prisons and public schools, stripped of their populations of subsidized aliens. Think of all the white-collar loafers who would lose their do-nothing jobs as teachers, social workers, and welfare administrators. And that is just what whites would enjoy. Imagine how happy black gang-bangers will be, when they no longer have to face the competition of more disciplined Mexican drug lords. They BGDs will once again own the prisons, instead of having to cower in fear of the Latin Kings.
To be sure, there is a downside. Cinco de Mayo festivities will suffer, and it will be just a little harder and more expensive to get stoned, but we all have to suffer. The people who will not suffer are the decent hard-working Mexican-Americans whom we shall no longer lump together with layabouts and criminals.
The next move is up to President Calderón.
If you really want to understand the full dimensions of the immigration crisis, you must buy our book Immigration and the American Future. This book, which Steve Sailer called “a trove of fact and knowledge,” ordinarily sells for $24.95 but if you respond by calling Cindy at (815) 964-5053 or send her an e-mail (click here), you can have it for $19.95 plus shipping. This offer will last only so long as this piece is on the front page of ChroniclesMagazine.org.
Four Rules of American Realpolitik
For the sake of simplicity, I am going to sketch out, as a preliminary, a few rules that should be obvious to everyone. The important part is to treat them as if they were universally true, when, in fact, they may only work 99% of the time. Rule number one: There are no unintended consequences, at least not in the sense that neoconservatives have used the phrase. People who pass welfare legislation are seeking power. While they may not entirely intend to degrade and enslave welfare recipients, they certainly do not wish them to be free and independent. The same rule applies, mutatis mutandis, to every government program, whether it is educators who stupify the students or military officers who use their services as indoctrination programs to inculcate feminism, multi-culturalism, and homosexualism, even though they are quite aware of the disastrous consequences to our preparedness.
Rule number two: People enter politics to benefit themselves. If a politician seems to be sacrificing his interest to the public good, it is always an illusion. He is either being blackmailed or he has an interest we have not yet perceived. Remember: For the sake of argument we can admit no exceptions. Even politicians who have ideals will always sacrifice them to the exigencies of power. You can almost always figure out what is going on when, for example, Orrin Hatch betrays every principle he has ever claimed to stand for. It may not be true that no one can run for office unless his party has documents or photographs that could ruin him, but it is never safe, in any given instance, to think otherwise.
Rule number three: The sole purpose for seeking higher office is to increase bribability. If, for example, a city councilman goes for $500 s vote, a state legislator will require several thousand, a congressman tens of thousands. I am speaking in terms of dollars, though, in fact the bribes can take many forms: women, drugs, junkets, favorable write-ups in major papers, access to more important power-brokers, or even the flattering attention of great men.
Finally, rule number four: Policies and programs are never aimed at doing the good their sponsors profess but only at advancing the interests of legislators, administrators, and the special interests who pay the bribes, whether those interests are Wall Street investment houses, labor unions, or minority ward heelers. There is, in these United States today, no such thing as good legislation.