Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

Recommended Photo Store
 
Buy Through Our Amazon Link or Banner to Support This Blog
 
 
 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Archive for the 'Immigration' Category

    How Can We Deal With Terrorism in the West ?

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 5th June 2017 (All posts by )

    Terrorism struck in London last Saturday night and PM Theresa May says, “Enough is enough “

    Does she mean it ? Probably but that does not mean anything useful will be done.
    Two thirds of British Muslims would not report a plot to police.

    The same poll revealed that over half of all British Muslims think homosexuality, the very act of gay sex, should be illegal in Britain. Another 23% want to tear down British common law and replace it with Islamic Sharia. Moreover, 39% believe that wives should always, without exception, obey the commands of their husbands; 31% of Muslim also believed that men (not women of course) should be legally permitted to practice polygamy and marry more than one wife.

    That doesn’t sound like assimilation. How about America ?

    Minnesota Somalis sound pretty much the same.

    ‘Is it right to kill someone who insults the prophet?’

    “Yes,” said the bearded man with the animated personality. “Because when you, every day you face frustration. And you know, every day you have, uh, you’re mad, or somebody says that, and you feel hate your soul. You could do anything you wanted. If you committed suicide, you don’t care, because your heart, your heart is telling you, ‘I don’t want to live no more,’ because you couldn’t take that much hate. Or you, you kill someone.”

    It’s not just Somalis.

    The Center for Security Policy released a poll Tuesday that should give all Americans pause. The results show that a startling number of American Muslims, our fellow citizens, agree that violence is a legitimate response to those who insult Islam. A full majority of 51% “agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”

    According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%). …

    Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

    A full 25% of those polled agreed that “violence against Americans here in the United States can be justified as part of the global jihad.”

    What do we do with this ?

    Spengler (David Goldman) has some suggestions.

    Sherman and Sheridan suppressed sniping at Union soldiers by Confederate civilians by burning the towns (just the towns, not the townsfolk) that sheltered them. In other words, they forced collective responsibility upon a hostile population, a doctrine that in peacetime is entirely repugnant, but that in wartime becomes unavoidable.

    I have read a lot about Sherman and his way of dealing with a hostile population was hang snipers and burn the villages that supported them.

    Collective punishment has gotten a bad reputation from the Germans in World War I and World War II. They would round up innocent civilians and execute them to punish guerilla attacks in the area. I am not advocating anything like that.

    Israel demolishes the homes of terrorists.

    “The police are going deeply into the Arab neighborhoods [in Jerusalem], which has not been done in the past,” he said. “We will demolish terrorists’ homes. We are allowing our forces to take strong action against those who throw rocks and firebombs. This is necessary in order to safeguard the security of Israeli citizens on the roads and everywhere.”

    Palestinians may consider children expendable but houses are more precious. How would we implement such a policy ?

    Many mosques have been used to store weapons and plan attacks.

    This is certainly the case in Israel.

    The 38-page report includes photographic evidence of weapons being stored under pulpits and elsewhere in mosques during December and January’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. It notes that Israeli troops fighting Hizballah in Lebanon, U.S. troops fighting terrorists in Iraq and even Palestinian Authority officials in the West Bank have encountered similar practices.

    How about in the US ? Mosques have been shown to teach violent extremism.

    The mosques in the US are largely funded by the Saudis which promote the Wahhabi extreme version of Islam.

    Firm figures are elusive, but estimates are that the Saudis fund up to 80% of American mosques, at least in part. And their goal is the same here as it is elsewhere in the world where Islam must compete with other religions: to prevent Muslims from integrating into the host society.

    If a terrorist is shown to have attended a mosque, that mosque should be closed.

    The terrorists are also winning a psychological war in Europe. They identify police informants and force them to become suicide bombers. That is why so many are “Known Wolves.”

    These attacks, in other words, are designed to impress the Muslim public as much as they are intended to horrify the western public. In so many words, the terrorists tell Muslims that western police agencies cannot protect them. If they cooperate with the police they will be found out and punished. The West fears the power of Islam: it evinces such fear by praising Islam as a religion of peace, by squelching dissent in the name of fighting supposed Islamophobia, and by offering concessions and apologies to Muslims.

    Demolishing or closing some homes and a few mosques might signal more resolution than speeches by politicians. Deporting a few families would also be salutary.

    Posted in Immigration, National Security, Terrorism | 38 Comments »

    Worthwhile Reading

    Posted by David Foster on 7th April 2017 (All posts by )

    Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan is, IMO, one of the more thoughtful of the financial industry CEO’s.  In his annual letter to shareholders, he devotes considerable space to the current situation of the United States–our assets, our problems, and potential paths for improvement.  The public policy section of the letter starts on page 32.

    My view of several issues is different from Mr Dimon’s, but I think the letter is well worth reading and thinking about.

    (Disclosure:  I’m a JPM investor)

    Posted in Business, Capitalism, Economics & Finance, Education, Entrepreneurship, Immigration, USA | 13 Comments »

    An Interesting Theory on Muslim Immigration.

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 23rd March 2017 (All posts by )

    I have been wondering why the political left, and to some extent the right, has been so enthusiastic about Muslim immigration. Islam is just not compatible with the liberal traditions of the West. So why the continued efforts to import Muslims ?

    Here is a novel theory.

    There’s no economic argument for importing Syrians or Turks. Muslims are overwhelmingly represented on the welfare roles. In Denmark, people from MENA countries make up 5% of the population, but consume 40% of welfare benefits. This is a story across Europe. It is not just the new arrivals. Turks in Germany have been there for a couple of generations and have been the worst performing economic group in the country. Estimates put the total working population at 20%, while the rest live off welfare benefits. Then there is the issue of sky high Muslim crime rates.

    The incident in London yesterday made clear that assimilation is not going to solve the problem. The terrorist was British born. Most of the sexual abusers in Rotherham were British born to Muslim immigrants.

    In September 2012, investigations by The Times based on confidential police and social services documents, found that abuse had been much more widespread than acknowledged.[24][25] It uncovered systematic sexual abuse of white girls by British Asian men (mostly of Pakistani origin)[26] in Rotherham for which people were not being prosecuted.

    Not only were they not being prosecuted but the British authorities had been covering up the abuse for years Why ?

    Is there popular support for importing these people, despite their uselessness as citizens? Again, there’s no data to suggest this is the case. European leaders could have put the issue to the voters, but they fanatically avoid it. In fact, anyone who dares run on the issue is branded a Nazi. Politicians love democracy when they are assured of winning. They avoid it when they are assured of losing. Therefore, it is safe to assume they don’t think this is a winner for them.

    So, the politicians seem to favor the immigrants over their own citizens. Why ?

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Britain, Europe, Immigration, Islam, Trump | 56 Comments »

    Trump has to choose a strategy.

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 12th February 2017 (All posts by )

    There has been a huge uproar over President Trump’s Executive order to limit immigration from seven Middle East countries that are in turmoil. A Seattle federal district judge issued a restraining order to block the immigration “pause.”

    The result is widely hailed by Democrats and the usual open borders advocates.

    Still, there is some trepidation about the Democrats’ vulnerability on this issue.

    Democratic arguments about immigration mostly aren’t arguments. The party has relied on opposing Trump’s more outrageously exaggerated claims about the criminality and all-around character flaws of immigrants. That’s fine, as far as it goes — but as November showed, it doesn’t go far enough.

    The core problem is that Democrats didn’t really make an affirmative argument for an overhaul to U.S. immigration policy that might appeal to voters. Instead, they talked a lot about what great people immigrants are, and how much they benefit from migration. Unfortunately, the clearest group of beneficiaries from this policy — people who want to migrate, but haven’t yet gotten a green card — can’t vote.

    Most of this is, like the British Labour Party, an attempt the replace one voting group with another.

    However, aside from the implications for employment for American citizens, there is the question of terrorism.

    We are conducting a war with radical Islam in the Middle East.

    How do we fight that war ?

    One of the problems facing the Trump administration is the lack of an overall strategy to defeat radical Islamism. The one left over from the Obama administration consists of a schizophrenic blend of attempting to solve “root causes” incongruously combined with a program of targeted assassination. “The U.S. dropped an average of three bombs an hour in 2016 — a total of 26,171 explosive devices dropped in seven countries in the past year” according to a report published at the close of President Barack Obama’s second term, not counting thousands of air strikes which went unreported according to the Military Times. This vast campaign of targeted aerial assassination was accompanied by what the Nation called “the secret nation-building boom of the Obama years”. By 2014 Obama had doubled “nation-building spending from $24.3 billion to $51.3 billion”.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Afghanistan/Pakistan, Immigration, Islam, Middle East, Terrorism | 27 Comments »

    FIRST A WALL, THEN A FILTER

    Posted by Subotai Bahadur on 5th February 2017 (All posts by )

    There is media mayhem is over the re-establishment of control of our borders. The idea that WE have a vested interest in the possible hostile intentions, the ability to function in our society, and the legality of those who want to enter our country is . . . unacceptable to those screaming on Facebook and rioting in the streets. Further, the idea that we can take steps to keep out those who we do not want in [you cannot deport criminals if they can just walk back across the border] seems to be a matter of controversy; even as we are starting the process of doing just that.

    But maybe this would be a good time to get ahead of the game. Let us say that all the measures discussed by the administration work, illegal immigration is cut drastically, and illegal invaders here now leave. Then what? The current “immigration system” does not work. It has not worked for generations. What should replace it?

    We are a nation of immigrants. Our freedoms draw the best and brightest from around the world. We also draw everybody else. In keeping with the sudden realization by a majority of Americans that the purpose of the American government is to protect and work for the American people; the government has to find a way to make sure that the immigrants allowed in are going to be in the best interest of OUR country.

    Up until now, the Federal government has been working to make sure that our immigrant intake is mostly uneducated and untrained Mexican and Central American peasants, and Islamic terrorists. I can see how a certain number of those peasants could be of some national utility. But not in the numbers we are getting. And I am sorry; we already have enough people here who want to destroy the country.

    And it is insanity to import them alone, while turning our back on the rest of the world. Time for some pro-American sanity.

    I would recommend what I call the “Ellis Island Tests” as a beginning.

    1) Do you have, or are you a carrier of, any loathsome disease that we do not want in our country infecting our own people? Especially if the disease is one that we have successfully worked to eradicate inside our own borders. TB and diphtheria come to mind, but there is a whole list of other diseases, some of which we NEVER have had here, that are a reasonable reason to say, “try the country next door”.
    2) Are you a member of, a relative of a member of, or affiliated in any way with political, criminal, or religious organizations that have declared hostility to the US, or who have sponsored or committed terrorist acts against Americans? If so, you can stay in a country where that point of view predominates. We don’t need you.
    3) Are you a convicted criminal, or are you affiliated with an organization, syndicate, or cartel that operates in violation of the law; then you get to play the home game and not come here. Unless your crime was to tell your home country’s dictator what to place where, with what amount of force, and at what angle. In which case you should probably get bonus points.

    Now note that these are proscriptive tests. If you fail, you are out. This is not a matter of quotas, participant trophies, or the employees of the Immigration system feeling good about how generous they are at the expense of the country. There is no constitutional right to pass, because these are foreigners, not in our country. This is a case of them asking for our indulgence to be let in. It is totally our choice whether to do so. And we have to place our own safety and our own interests above their wishes. Many will try, a relative few will be chosen. To continue the tests in a more positive sense:

    4) Does the applicant have a skill that we want or need in this country? Has he or she been trained in a skill we need and are not producing enough of in this country? And if trained to standards not the same as ours, can they achieve our standards? Doctors, nurses, engineers; any profession we are in need of. And I note that we have a superabundance of lawyers and bureaucrats, to the point where we may have to open a season on them to prevent them from destroying the country.
    5) Fluency in English would be considered a plus. And it would cover one of the requirements below.
    6) If you are a spouse, child, or parent of an American citizen you would get a preference, but the relationships for immigration preference will not be extended further.
    7) Immigrants will need a sponsor, who is an American citizen, who will be responsible for aiding in the acclimation to the American culture, society, and mores; and who will ensure that from the time of their arrival and granting of resident alien status until they file their application for naturalization [residency time of 5 years in most cases] that they do not go on public assistance in any way other than declared states of disaster. The sponsor may not be a corporation, nor may a sponsor be an employee of any company that the resident alien is employed by. Resident aliens are covered and protected by all employment laws and standards that apply to US citizens. Sponsors will be liable as accessories if the resident alien is illegally exploited due to their lack of citizenship status. The laws of the country and the Constitution protect all those who legally reside here. Resident aliens who are illegally exploited due to their status and whose sponsorship arrangements are broken due to court action shall be allowed a period of 6 months to seek and arrange a new sponsorship.
    8) Before naturalization, all applicants will be tested and must demonstrate a fluency in English. This is not to disparage the use of other languages in private life. Officially, we do not care what language is spoken in the home or on the street. However, it is a fact that our country’s history, commerce, and culture are primarily in English. In order to fully participate, in order to not be exploited, in order not to be ghettoized and abused by the unscrupulous; it is vital that new citizens be able to understand the world around them.
    9) As currently, applicants for naturalization will be required to pass an examination on American Civics, Government, History, and the political process prior to being naturalized. And as currently, they will be required to swear the Oath to the Constitution prior to being granted citizenship.

    Now that is a quick outline of the selection process for individuals. Note that nowhere in there is there any hint of discrimination on a racial, ethnic, religious, gender, or other basis. It is a matter of objectively meeting requirements to become an American.

    But there is a larger view. We need immigrants. We need their drive, their ambition, their desire to build a better life for their offspring. And we need to draw on the talents of the wide world in order to be the City on the Hill. But we don’t need everybody. The last year we have full figures for is fiscal 2015. We legally admitted a hair over 1 million [actually 1,051,000] legal immigrants from all over the world. In fiscal year 2016 we caught 407,000 trying to sneak into our country, mostly on the border with Mexico. Given the not unreasonable assumption that for every one caught, 10 don’t get caught [remember, the Border Patrol has been ordered to encourage illegal invaders for the last 8 years], that gives a projected 4 million illegals, or 4 for every legal immigrant.

    We must stop illegal immigration. But we must not stop immigration. We must encourage legal immigration. In 2015 the Census Bureau estimates that we had a population of about 321.5 million. So annual legal immigration was about 3/10 of 1% of our population. That 3/10 of 1% of our population has not caused any significant problems. We have had during the same period about 1.2% of our population coming in illegally per year. And it has been a major pain in the Tuchus, and a deadly threat, for the country.

    So, let’s say that 3/10 of 1% of our problem becomes an immigration floor for the number we admit LEGALLY each year. And since LEGAL immigrants are actual net assets to the country, we can absorb more. So let us say as a guesstimate that we put a ceiling, adjustable as needed by statute, of 1% of our current population per year as the number of LEGAL immigrants we can take.

    That gives us a range to work with, once we’ve secured our borders and removed illegal invaders. With that, I suggest the following process or something close to it be adopted:

    a) Every year, along with the budget [and definitely tied to the ICE or successor organization budget] the Congress of the United States will pick a number inside that range as the number of LEGAL immigrants that the US will allow in.
    b) That number will divided among 6 of the 7 Continents [North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia], Antarctica being excluded because penguins are too addicted to the thug life to be let in. I note Greenland is governed by Denmark and has so few people that it can be counted as Europe. It will have to be decided, for our purposes, where the exact boundaries between continents are; but that is what we are paying all those paper-pushers for, and all that matters is that they are consistent. The division will be proportional based on the population of the continent.
    c) Once the number for each continent has been determined for the year, a joint committee of representatives from the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the Department of Homeland Security will meet chaired by a representative appointed by the President.
    d) The joint committee will go through the list of countries on each continent and evaluate them based on their diplomatic, military, and trade actions towards the United States in the previous year and current actions. Such deliberations and the reasons for the decisions shall be classified and not released. If a country is determined to have posed or to pose a threat to the US and its interests based on those actions, they will be denied an immigration quota for that year. Those countries that are deemed not to be or to have posed a threat to the US or its interests shall divide the continent’s immigration quota proportionally based on population. As an example Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Libya, and the Sudan have been the source of most of the terrorist attacks on ourselves and our allies. Why, right now, do we have a desperate need to import more of them? If the attacks stop, and give signs of staying stopped, we might reconsider in a later year.
    e) The recommendations will be forwarded to the President, and if he approves the numbers will be the basis of the immigration quotas for the coming year.
    f) This quota does not include the emergency admission of refugees or disaster victims, which as always is within the power of the President to approve or deny.

    You know, of course, that the Democrats and their allies even further to the Left will be screaming like a cacophony of goosed coloraturas if anything like this is enacted. Illegal vote farms destroyed? Check. American people protected from two-legged predators? Check. Rule of law reinstated? Check. Welfare fraud, spending, deficits, and eventually taxes reduced? Check and double check.

    We lock the door at night, not because we hate everybody outside, but to protect our loved ones inside. It does not mean that we do not open that door for invited guests.

    Posted in Immigration | 30 Comments »

    How Long?

    Posted by Sgt. Mom on 27th December 2016 (All posts by )

    Hail, thou ever blessed morn,
    Hail redemption’s happy dawn,
    Sing through all Jerusalem,
    Christ is born in Bethlehem.
    Edward Caswall, 1858 – Hymn for Christmas Day (Also known as See Amid the Winter Snow)

    I have a deep and abiding fondness for certain choral music; Christmas carols or even sort-of-Christmas carols, especially the English ones which weren’t part of my growing-up-Lutheran tradition. That tradition tended more towards the Germanic side of the scale, save for hymns by the Wesleys and Isaac Watts. The English Victorians … sufficient to say that a lot of such hymns and carols were pretty ghastly as poetry, music and theology combined, but time has done some sifting out and the best of them usually turn up in seasonal presentations like the Festival of Nine Lessons and Carols from Kings’ College, Cambridge. I make a point of listening to the BBC broadcast of it, every year on Christmas Eve morning. I’ve become so very fond of some carols I’ve heard through that broadcast that I’ve made a point of searching out YouTube recordings of them to post on my various websites. All In the Bleak Midwinter is one, Once in David’s Royal City is another – and See Amid the Winter Snow is another still. (Link here) I’ve replayed the video so often in the last few days, I have finally learned the melody by heart … and the chorus haunts me this particular Christmas. Sing through all Jerusalem, Christ is born in Bethlehem!

    It’s not just that the UN has resolved, in the face of an abstention by the US, to back a claim by the Palestinians to Jerusalem, or that a Jewish infant born in Bethlehem these days might be a hate crime in progress according to pro-Palestine activists. Once a town largely Christian, most local Christians have been chased out, just as Jews and Christians have been from practically everywhere else in the Islamic world. Well, that’s the Middle East for you, everywhere outside of Israel. The ethnic-cleansing of everyone but Muslims of whatever flavor goes on, unabated in the Middle East accompanied by a chorus of indifference sung by the Western ruling class, who seem intent on an Olympic-qualification level of virtue-signaling.
    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Christianity, Civil Liberties, Civil Society, Current Events, Europe, France, Germany, Holidays, Immigration, Islam, Middle East, Religion, Terrorism | 50 Comments »

    Speculations, and Positions, for the Public Record

    Posted by Jay Manifold on 1st November 2016 (All posts by )

    One week out seems like a good time to put some stakes in the ground.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Anti-Americanism, Christianity, Civil Liberties, Civil Society, Current Events, Elections, History, Immigration, International Affairs, Israel, Libertarianism, National Security, Personal Narrative, Politics, Predictions, Society, Terrorism, Trump, USA | 20 Comments »

    US Immigration defined

    Posted by TM Lutas on 5th September 2016 (All posts by )

    Immigration is defined in law in a pretty straightforward manner. If you cross US borders, you are defined as an immigrant unless you fit into one of twenty two different non-immigrant categories defined in 8USC§1101(a)(15). Each letter subsection of that section corresponds to the more familiar letter codes for non-immigrant visas. Most people are not familiar with all of them but the definitions aren’t particularly complex or confusing. If you’re seeking to cross the border as an immigrant, there are several sections under 8USC Subchapter II that apply. If you are a citizen, you’ve got to have a passport to leave or return.

    Neither side in the immigration debate seems to want to lay out, specifically, what sections of the law they wish to change and how exactly they want to change it. Are there extremist imams getting R visas and endangering the safety of americans (mostly muslims)? That’s not the way we talk about immigration. Why,exactly, is the secretary of Labor involved in the issuance of visas?

    We’d be a lot better off if discussion of the law had a lot more law in it.

    Posted in Immigration, Law | 6 Comments »

    There is no such thing as immigration

    Posted by TM Lutas on 4th September 2016 (All posts by )

    Immigration is like darkness. It is the absence of something, not something in and of itself. It is a partial restoration of the state of nature.

    The natural state of man is that we move as we please. We stop people from moving as they or we please for various reasons. These stopping points are generally, but not exclusively called borders. Borders are not permanent. They can be moved, erased, reconstituted again. As any observer of Europe will note it can happen quickly and pretty often. Borders do not have to be impermeable. They can have exceptions to the rules. When people are peacefully allowed to cross borders permanently according to the will of the people controlling the border as an exception to the general rule of no crossings, it’s called immigration. Since most borders are controlled by more than one group, the exiting group often calls it a different term than the entry group.

    You cannot create a proper system of exceptions to a rule without understanding why the rule exists. But ask people who have strong opinions on immigration why borders exist and more times than not, they haven’t considered the question at all. You could intuit why we have borders by the exceptions but almost nobody does, not even immigration restrictionists. We’re all playing the old game of blind men feeling the elephant and having opinions as to what it is.

    Posted in Deep Thoughts, Immigration | 20 Comments »

    News, Covered

    Posted by Sgt. Mom on 31st August 2016 (All posts by )

    There have been any number of important stories covered by the nationally-based establishment media in the last decade or so – in the deathless phrase tweeted by Iowahawk, David Burge, “with a pillow, until they stop moving.” Through the internet and alternate media, a good many of those stories that would have stopped moving through judicious use of the media pillow in previous decades – have still managed to percolate from those alternate media sites into the national mass media conversation. Things like the Dan Rather/TANG faked memo, the Swift Boat Veterans going after John Kerry as the duty-shirking Eddie Haskell of the Swift Boat service and dozens of other incidents fought off the smothering pillow, the Chick-Fil-A boycott, and yes – eventually got discovered in the major media outlets. With considerable reluctance, one might add. The matter of black on white violent crime may be on the edge of being discovered by the mainstream media, much as the Hollywood producer in the Godfather movie discovered the head of a dead horse in his bed.
    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Americas, Civil Society, Crime and Punishment, Current Events, Immigration, Law Enforcement, Media, The Press | 11 Comments »

    What is “alt-Right” in this year’s election ?

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 28th August 2016 (All posts by )

    There is a new theme for the Democrats in this year’s election. Hillary calls it the “Alt-Right.”

    The New York Times is alarmed.

    As Hillary Clinton assailed Donald J. Trump on Thursday for fanning the flames of racism embraced by the “alt-right,” the community of activists that tends to lurk anonymously in the internet’s dark corners could hardly contain its glee.

    Mrs. Clinton’s speech was intended to link Mr. Trump to a fringe ideology of conspiracies and hate, but for the leaders of the alt-right, the attention from the Democratic presidential nominee was a moment in the political spotlight that offered a new level of credibility. It also provided a valuable opportunity for fund-raising and recruiting.

    Jared Taylor, editor of the white nationalist publication American Renaissance, live-tweeted Mrs. Clinton’s remarks, questioning her praise of establishment Republicans and eagerly anticipating her discussion of his community.

    According to Hillary and the Times, Donald Trump is defined by those who say they support him more than by what he says himself.

    If Hillary and Bernie Sanders are supported by communists, does that make them communists ? This is an odd year and will get worse.

    A better explanation of “alt-Right” is provided by two spokesmen for another view.

    A specter is haunting the dinner parties, fundraisers and think-tanks of the Establishment: the specter of the “alternative right.” Young, creative and eager to commit secular heresies, they have become public enemy number one to beltway conservatives — more hated, even, than Democrats or loopy progressives.
    The alternative right, more commonly known as the alt-right, is an amorphous movement. Some — mostly Establishment types — insist it’s little more than a vehicle for the worst dregs of human society: anti-Semites, white supremacists, and other members of the Stormfront set. They’re wrong.

    I wasn’t even aware of this controversy until Ann Althouse put up a post on the subject after Hillary raised it.

    She quotes a man who was ejected from the Hillary speech.

    “I call myself alt right because the conservative establishment right in this country does not represent my views, they are just as much to blame for the disaster taking place in America as the left, the alt right to me is fiscal responsibility, secure borders, enforcement of immigration laws, ending the PC culture, and promoting AMERICA FIRST (Not Sharia First)… If you come to this country legally, follow the laws, learn our language, and love the country, you are equal, no matter your color, or religion. Basically alt-right is to separate ourselves from the failing establishment right.

    That post led to over 300 comments on her blog. She then posted a survey. The results were interesting.

    alt-right poll

    I voted for the choice “I’m most of all of what it stands for but I don’t use that term, myself.”

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Book Notes, Civil Society, Conservatism, Culture, Elections, Immigration, Leftism, Trump | 34 Comments »

    Trump and the Disconnected Elites.

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 13th August 2016 (All posts by )

    Peggy Noonan has an excellent column today suggesting she understands why Trump is popular with the non-elite countrymen (and women).

    She discusses Angela Merkel and her invitation to Muslims to invade Germany.

    Last summer when Europe was engulfed with increasing waves of migrants and refugees from Muslim countries, Ms. Merkel, moving unilaterally, announced that Germany would take in an astounding 800,000. Naturally this was taken as an invitation, and more than a million came. The result has been widespread public furor over crime, cultural dissimilation and fears of terrorism. From such a sturdy, grounded character as Ms. Merkel the decision was puzzling—uncharacteristically romantic about people, how they live their lives, and history itself, which is more charnel house than settlement house.

    Germans are unhappy about the behavior of Muslim men, the majority of the immigrants.They are not happy.

    The anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD), now the third-most popular political party in Germany, adopted a manifesto calling for curbs to migration and restrictions on Islam. The document calls for a ban on minarets, Muslim calls to prayer and full-face veils.

    May 2. Hans-Georg Maaßen, the head of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, revealed that around 90 “predominately Arabic-speaking” mosques in Germany are under surveillance. He said they involve mostly “backyard mosques” where “self-proclaimed imams and self-proclaimed emirs” are “inciting their followers to jihad.” He called on moderate Muslims to work with the government to fight extremism and defend the constitutional order. Maaßen was speaking ahead of a security conference in Berlin at which he said that his agency we receiving on average four terror alerts every day: “The Islamic State is committed to attacking Germany and German interests.”

    Missus Merkel is unmoved.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Elections, Germany, Immigration, Trump | 27 Comments »

    He Saw It Coming

    Posted by Jonathan on 12th August 2016 (All posts by )

    Seth Barrett Tillman on Global Elites, the current crisis and someone who foresaw it many years ago.

    Posted in Europe, Immigration, Trump | 1 Comment »

    Quote of the Day

    Posted by Jonathan on 6th July 2016 (All posts by )

    Dale Franks, Vote Properly, You Virulent Racist!:

    But let’s go even further. Even if you could prove that, on balance, free trade is an unquestionable economic benefit, people might still prefer to be measurably poorer if that’s the price that must be paid to maintain their traditional social and political cultures. (This has even more relevance in the case of the EU, because the EU actually has power. Imagine if NAFTA had an unelected Commission in Ottowa or Mexico City that could impose laws on the United States.) Perhaps people don’t regard their economic interests as important as their national or cultural interests. It doesn’t matter what elite opinion thinks the people’s most important interests are. In a democratic society, ultimately, it only matters what the people think they are. People get to determine their own priorities, and not have them dictated by elites. The people get to answer for themselves the question, “In what kind of country do I want to live?”
     
    Of course, I would argue that we don’t have truly free trade or, increasingly, a free economy in the United States. The Progressives always look at the rising income inequality and maintain that it’s the inevitable result of capitalism. That’s hogwash, of course, and Proggies believe it because they’re dolts. But the problem in this country isn’t free trade—we have precious little of it—or unrestricted capitalism, since we have precious little of that as well. The issue behind rising income inequality isn’t capitalism, it’s cronyism. Income isn’t being redirected to the 1% because capitalism has failed, it’s happening because we abandoned capitalism in favor of the regulatory crony state and its de facto collusion between big business/banking interests and a government that directs capital to favored political clients, who become “too big to fail”. It doesn’t matter, for instance, whether the president is a Democrat or Republican, because we know the Treasury Secretary will be a former—and future—Goldman Sachs executive.

    Franks’s post is very well thought through and ties together the main themes that appear to be driving US, British and European politics. It’s worth reading in full if you haven’t yet done so.

    Posted in America 3.0, Capitalism, Civil Society, Conservatism, Crony Capitalism, Culture, Current Events, Economics & Finance, Elections, Human Behavior, Immigration, Leftism, Political Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Society, Tea Party, Tradeoffs, Trump | 9 Comments »

    Seth Barrett Tillman: Reflections on the Revolution in the UK: Parts 3 and 4

    Posted by Jonathan on 1st July 2016 (All posts by )

    Part 3: Farage’s Poster Is Racist:

    Farage was called a racist (and worse [1 minute mark]) for this poster.
     
    Yet, no one claims this photograph was a fake, i.e., a staged photograph made with actors and props. No one claims that it was photoshopped. No one claims that the skin tone of the people in the photograph was altered or, even, darkened. No one claims that the photograph was out of date. And no one claims that the picture is not representative of the pattern of large scale immigration coming into the European Union (here, Slovenia—an EU member state) from the Third World.
     
    In other words, if you reproduce a photograph of an actual, recent event, you are a racist…

    and

    Part 4: Errors of the Labour Party and the Remain Camp:

    A fictionalized exchange on television between any Labour candidate for MP and an audience member during the 2015 general election …
     

    [. . .]
     
    Labour Candidate for Parliament: I understand. New immigrants—frequently coming without skills that fit the modern U.K. economy—cause wage compression at the low end of the wage scale. We will make sure employers pay the minimum wage; we will ensure that your economic interests are protected.
     
    Audience Member: No, that’s not my point (at least, that’s not my only point). I don’t like how our society is being changed by mass immigration. I don’t like polygamy. It is illegal, but no one gets prosecuted for it. I don’t like FGM. It too is illegal, but it is not actively prosecuted. I don’t like it when the immigrants’ customs are accommodated in these ways—I don’t want our criminal laws ignored by the immigrants or by the police and the prosecutors. It makes me feel unsafe—it makes me think the immigrants’ way of life is preferred over ours. The immigrants should be integrated into our communities, not the other way around.
     
    Labour Candidate for Parliament: I understand. We will work to ensure that your wages are not compressed.
     
    Audience Member: You’re not listening. That’s not what I said: I don’t like the direction your party’s immigration policies under Blair & Brown have taken our country. I don’t like where we are now as a result—not that Cameron has done anything to modify those policies.
     
    [. . .]

    Read the whole series.

    Posted in Anglosphere, Big Government, Britain, Civil Society, Conservatism, Current Events, Elections, Europe, Immigration, Leftism, Political Philosophy, Politics, Trump | 1 Comment »

    Seth Barrett Tillman: Reflections on the Revolution in the UK

    Posted by Jonathan on 30th June 2016 (All posts by )

    The first two posts of a five-post series:

    Part 1: It Is All Cameron’s Fault:

    Finally, you might ask why did Cameron promise the referendum in his party’s election manifesto? It is simple. Even with the promise of a referendum, Cameron barely overcame the UKIP surge: a 3.8 million vote surge. It was only by peeling off voters from UKIP—through the promise of the in-out referendum—that made him PM. Had he not made this election pledge, any number of marginal Tory seats would have tipped: Labour, Lib-Dem, or UKIP. There was no blunder here by Cameron. It was not the referendum which destroyed Cameron’s ministry; rather, it was the promise of a referendum which made Cameron the Prime Minister in the first instance.
     
    [. . .]
     
    Parties who have been rejected at the polls twice should engage in meaningful introspection, at least, if they expect to be taken seriously in the future. The let’s put all the blame on Cameron position lacks just the sort of gravitas that one hopes to see in serious opposition parties.

    and

    Part 2: The U.K.’s Bradley/Wilder Effect Is Enough To Swing Elections:

    If a society permits those who engage in wilful violence and those that command the police & the revenue office to drive normal political expression underground, then that society will not have normal political expression. One consequence of the lack of normal political expression is that every poll will lack validity.*

    (Related: Brexit, Predictions and Trump.)

    Posted in Anglosphere, Britain, Civil Society, Current Events, Elections, Europe, Human Behavior, Immigration, International Affairs, Politics, Polls, Predictions, Tea Party, Trump | 2 Comments »

    The Preference Cascade is Building.

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 24th June 2016 (All posts by )

    Brexit

    The Brexit vote in Britain has rocked the country with elites and immigrants most affected.

    The vote to “Remain” was a majority in Scotland, Northern Ireland and in London and several other large cities with large “immigrant” populations.

    Protesters are planning to march to London’s Shard building to demonstrate against the ‘racist’ and anti-migrant rhetoric of the EU Referendum campaign.

    The march, announced in a Facebook post by the Revolutionary Socialism in the 21st Century, was due travel from a park in Whitechapel to the headquarters of New Corporation next to the Shard at 6pm.

    All is proceeding as expected.

    The decision has prompted a large market selloff, which will probably persist until the effects are better understood. Those campaigning to “Remain” have used various threats and predictions of doom, so the immediate result is not unexpected. Of course, the political left is hysterical at the idea that voters don’t want to be governed by remote elites.

    On Thursday British voters willfully walked off a cliff when they decided to leave the European Union. The “Brexit” victory is a defeat for Britain, Europe and the global economy.

    Tens of millions of Britons voted for isolation — to go it alone — rather than for cooperation. The European Union just lost a sixth of its economy, roughly akin to Florida and California seceding from the United States. The impact on the British economy could be catastrophic. Europe’s unified stance against a reemerging and aggressive Russia will be splintered.

    Who could imagine that people would not want a thousand bureaucrats in Brussels, or for that matter Washington DC, micromanaging their lives ? Well, I know someone.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Anglosphere, Big Government, Britain, Elections, Europe, Immigration, Trump | 37 Comments »

    The Federal Government’s “BIG LIE” About Muslim Terrorism in Orlando

    Posted by Trent Telenko on 16th June 2016 (All posts by )

    In its public relations on Omar Mateen’s attack in the Pulse night club in Orlando, the federal government is engaged in a propaganda technique know as “The Big Lie”.  That is, it’s stating an untruth often enough to get people to believe it.

    The Big Lie in this case, stated by both FBI Director James Comey and President Obama is that Omar Mateen was a “lone wolf” that “self-radicalized over the Internet.”

    It is four days after the Pulse attack.  Omar Mateen spent 18 days in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in 2011 and 2012. There is no way that all the associates of Mateen in those two trips can be known in four days.  Nor what if any training or Islamist materials Mateen might have received on small items like USB drives while on those trips.

    See if you can spot all the weasel words from this Fox News story passage quoting the Saudi Ministry of the Interior —

    A Saudi Ministry of Interior spokesman confirmed that Mateen twice performed the umrah Islamic pilgrimage and that travel records showed he also visited the United Arab Emirates on one of the trips. But he said Saudi officials, who closely surveil tourists deemed to be a terror threat, had no evidence Mateen traveled to Yemen of made contact with known extremists during his visits to the Kingdom.”

    Weasel Phrase #1 & questions raised —

     Mateen twice performed the umrah Islamic pilgrimage…

     

    1. Did Mateen attend Mosques or other Islamic organizations in Saudi Arabia with ‘extremist’ connections?
    2.  Did people who became extremists after 2011 to 2012 attend Saudi Mosques or other Islamic organizations at the same time as Mateen or travel with Mateen?

    Weasel Phrase #2 & questions raised —

    …had no evidence Mateen traveled to Yemen or made contact with known extremists during his visits to the Kingdom.

     

    1. Would the Saudis know if Mateen meet ‘known extremists’ in the UAE?

    2. Did people who the UAE consider ‘extremists’ meet Mateen?

    3. Did Mateen attend mosques or other Islamic organizations in the UAE with extremist connections, and at the same time as then-unknown ‘extremists’?

    Given the simple questions raised above, there is absolutely no reasonable way that Pres. Obama and the FBI Director stating that Omar Mateen “self-radicalized” can be considered as anything but a deliberate lie after only four days of investigation.

    LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS

    Given the use of the Big Lie on Orlando by FBI Director James Comey, we now have to assume all the following about organizations, politics and near-future events.

    1. FBI Director James Comey is President Obama’s partisan “good dog” in the same sense that Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Director of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper are.
    2. The federal government’s top priority in dealing with Muslim terrorism in the USA will remain political correctness in surveillance before attacks and narrative damage control after attacks, rather than prevention of attacks.
    3. There will be an increasing number of domestic Muslim terrorist attacks because of the Obama administration’s open-borders immigration policy and refusal to properly vet this immigrant stream for radical Islamic Terrorists.
    4. Republicans now see DHS and FBI counterintelligence as an utterly Democratic partisan organization like the IRS.
    5. The first Republican-majority government after the San Bernardino and Orlando terrorist attacks will see a new, independent, federal counterintelligence agency with an utterly partisan GOP senior leadership established.
    6. And last, there will be no indictment of Hillary Clinton over her illegal e-mail server unless and until Donald Trump wins the presidency.

    Make your preparations for the future accordingly.

    Posted in Big Government, Current Events, Elections, Immigration, International Affairs, Law Enforcement, Leftism, Middle East, National Security, Obama, Politics, Predictions, Terrorism, Trump, War and Peace | 40 Comments »

    The Trump Preference Cascade is Moving Along.

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 30th April 2016 (All posts by )

    rally

    Earlier in the year, I predicted that a preference cascade is forming around Trump.

    “This illustrates, in a mild way, the reason why totalitarian regimes collapse so suddenly. (Click here for a more complex analysis of this and related
    issues). Such regimes have little legitimacy, but they spend a lot of effort making sure that citizens don’t realize the extent to which their fellow-citizens dislike the regime. If the secret police and the censors are doing their job, 99% of the populace can hate the regime and be ready to revolt against it – but no revolt will occur because no one realizes that everyone else feels the same way.

    We are in a similar period right now. No one wants to put a Trump bumper sticker on their car because it seems an invitation to vandalism.

    Siva is accused of slashing the tires of a Ford Focus and pouring yogurt into the car’s open sunroof while it was parked at a Gig Harbor Fred Meyer.

    Police say Siva told them he attacked the vehicle because of the Trump sticker on the rear bumper. Siva allegedly told police he considered the sticker a “hate symbol” and vandalizing the car “improved the community.”

    The victim of the crime is considered to be at fault because his bumper sticker was a “hate symbol.”

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Civil Society, Current Events, Elections, Immigration, Trump | 79 Comments »

    How Much Power Does the President Have?

    Posted by Michael Hiteshew on 19th April 2016 (All posts by )

    Can the president decree that a US law be ignored or even reversed if it advances his party’s political agenda? If so, is that not legislating from the Oval Office?

    The US Constitution, Article I, Section I:  All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

    If the president can grant deportation relief to 5 million immigrants here illegally – for whatever reason – what law cannot be reversed? What law has any meaning?

    Supreme Court justices seem divided on Obama immigration actions

    And what does it say about the current ideological makeup of the court that half the justices think this is a valid and legal course of action for a president? And assuming that Hillary is our next president and will appoint at least one far left justice, what is the likelihood the Constitution means anything at all anymore? Are we moving into the endgame, the first tentative steps of dictatorship, fully blessed and sanctified by the US Supreme Court?

    Posted in Immigration, Law, Political Philosophy | 15 Comments »

    Why Importing Foreign Doctors May Not Solve the Shortage.

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 17th April 2016 (All posts by )

    MoS2 Template Master

    The coming doctor shortage that I have previously written about might be dealt with as Canada did with theirs some years ago, by importing foreign medical graduates. Britain has adopted a similar plan as thousands of younger doctors plan to leave Britain.

    How is the plan to import foreign doctors working out ?

    Not very well.

    Nearly three-quarters of doctors struck off the medical register in Britain are foreign, according to shocking figures uncovered in a Mail on Sunday investigation.
    Medics who trained overseas have been banned from practising for a series of shocking blunders and misdemeanours.
    Cases include an Indian GP who ran an immigration scam from his surgery, a Ghanaian neurosurgeon who pretended he had removed a patient’s brain tumour, and a Malaysian doctor who used 007-style watches to secretly film intimate examinations with his female patients.

    First of all, foreign medical schools are often limited in real experience and students often graduate with nothing beyond classroom lectures.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Big Government, Education, Health Care, Immigration, Medicine | 15 Comments »

    “Part II, Louise Arbour’s Millions”

    Posted by Jonathan on 11th April 2016 (All posts by )

    From Seth Barrett Tillman’s update on an earlier post that was linked here:

    “Louise Arbour had one response to Farage and Steyn that, I think, was missed by the audience and by F & S. Arbour said:”

    Read the rest of Seth’s new post here.

    Posted in Anglosphere, Civil Society, Europe, Immigration, Leftism, Political Philosophy, Politics, Tradeoffs | 2 Comments »

    “Louise Arbour Welcomes You To Administrative Unit 34B”

    Posted by Jonathan on 8th April 2016 (All posts by )

    From Seth Barrett Tillman’s new post about western cultural confidence (and the lack thereof):

    Our administrative unit’s official motto is: Health, Fairness, Environment, Culture. So it should not surprise you that we chose you among other applicants seeking to immigrate to our (now your) prefecture because you have (as far as we can discover) no strongly held views, on anything. We believe that (former) outsiders like you from distant regions add to our ever-growing cultural diversity, but we seek to do so in a way that guarantees our social cohesion.
     
    In the event that you violate a minor domestic regulation (i.e., under Schedule 1 and its annex) and you are under 18, you will be assigned community service and ordered to apologize to any victims of your wrongdoing (should they remain alive). If you violate a major domestic regulation (i.e., under Schedule 2 and its annex) and you are over 18, you will be sent down for correction, but we cannot send you back to your former prefecture, as it is in political disarray and your human rights may be threatened by your return there. Your statutory right to residence vests after 60 days; your statutory right to vote in municipal elections vests after 6 months; your statutory right to vote in prefecture-wide elections and for an inter-prefecture delegate vests after 1 year…

    Highly recommended.

    Posted in Anglosphere, Civil Society, Europe, Immigration, Leftism, Political Philosophy, Politics, Tradeoffs | 2 Comments »

    What I Saw at the Revolution.

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 21st March 2016 (All posts by )

    Zulu Dawn

    News from the front today. First, Glenn Reynolds explains where Trump came from.

    The thing is, we had that movement. It was the Tea Party movement. Unlike Brooks, I actually ventured out to “intermingle” with Tea Partiers at various events that I covered for PJTV.com, contributing commentary to the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Examiner. As I reported from one event in Nashville, “Pundits claim the tea partiers are angry — and they are — but the most striking thing about the atmosphere in Nashville was how cheerful everyone seemed to be. I spoke with dozens of people, and the responses were surprisingly similar. Hardly any had ever been involved in politics before. Having gotten started, they were finding it to be not just worthwhile, but actually fun. Laughter rang out frequently, and when new-media mogul Andrew Breitbart held forth on a TV interview, a crowd gathered and broke into spontaneous applause. A year ago (2009), many told me, they were depressed about the future of America. Watching television pundits talk about President Obama’s transformative plans for big government, they felt alone, isolated and helpless.

    Bingo !

    Now, we have Act Two. Will Hillary’s “Thin Blue Line of rust belt states hold ?

    Lt William Vereker, on a routine patrol from the British camp at Isandlwana looked down into the Ngwebeni valley to find it boiling with the hitherto unseen main Zulu Army of 20,000 men.

    As in 1879 the political scouts are rushing back to inform the camp of the unanticipated development. Shocked but still undaunted, the pundits remain confident that the threat can be stopped by the Democrat “Blue Wall” in the industrial and upper Midwest. There, media artillery and the technologically superior liberal ground game are expected to hold the line against the angry white voter.

    Read the rest, as Glenn says.

    Now, we have the horrified GOPe. To Peter Wehner, Trump is the scary black face in the forest.

    It is stunning to contemplate, particularly for those of us who are lifelong Republicans, but we now live in a time when the organizing principle that runs through the campaign of the Republican Party’s likely nominee isn’t adherence to a political philosophy — Mr. Trump has no discernible political philosophy — but an encouragement to political violence.

    Mr. Trump’s supporters will dismiss this as hyperbole, but it is the only reasonable conclusion that his vivid, undisguised words allow for. As the examples pile up, we should not become inured to them. “I’d like to punch him in the face,” Mr. Trump said about a protester in Nevada. (“In the old days,” Mr. Trump fondly recalled, protesters would be “carried out in a stretcher.”)

    OMG! What happened to “hit back twice as hard!” or “Bring a gun to a knife fight?” Rudeness will not be tolerated in the GOPe.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Civil Society, Current Events, Elections, Immigration, Islam, Leftism, Politics, Trump | 32 Comments »

    Food 2 – Assimilation 1

    Posted by Ginny on 17th March 2016 (All posts by )

    The distinction between rich and poor was large in 1900, less large in 1950, larger again now. My husband’s tax accountant friend keeps arguing that taxes made the difference – so we need more of them. Well, maybe, he knows a hell of a lot more about taxes than I do. Of course, that seems counterproductive. Equally obvious is that large percentages of immigrants will add to the bottom rungs of an open market economy and their assimilation over the next generations (if immigration is lessened for a generation or two) is likely to lessen overall disparities.
    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Anglosphere, Anti-Americanism, Book Notes, Immigration | 18 Comments »