The book is both a sensible call for making family formation more affordable for younger Americans, and a demented demand for tripling the population of the United States (currently one-third of a billion) via immigration, thus ruining the chances of tens of millions of actual Americans to afford marriage and children.
There’s really no way to reconcile Yglesias’ two requests:
- We should figure out smart ways to make life a little less stressful for Americans so they can have children as well as careers; and
- We should also encourage the rest of the world to crowd into the U.S. and horn in on the birthrights of American citizens.
[...]
Of course, mid-20th-century USA was far more unified, due to the immigration shutdown in the 1920s that wisely ruled that no interest groups would be allowed to use immigration to change the country’s ethnic balance. Hence, the political system was more cooperative and functional than today when Democratic pundits like Yglesias’ partner at Vox Ezra Klein alternate between boasting that immigration will bury whiteness and complaining that whites are paranoid about being replaced.
Now Democrats envision using immigration to alter the racial balance to achieve perpetual one-party rule.
One obvious problem with this plan, however, is that all the immigrant ethnicities would then turn on each other in a struggle to control the capital of the world. Why compete with the United State militarily if you can use your co-ethnic immigrants to simply subvert the USA from within (such as this week’s example of an immigrant NYPD officer arrested for spying for China on Tibetan exiles), especially if Washington were so foolish as to invite in two-thirds of a billion immigrants?
Germany would have liked to do that using German immigrants in 1917, but the self-righteous WASP ruling class proactively crushed any German-American resistance with heavy-handed assimilation methods, such as banning Beethoven concerts.
But these days the Chinese are slowly learning how to play the White Guilt card against America. In an era when extirpating the vanishing phenomenon of White Privilege obsesses the American establishment, it’s inconceivable that we would take effective steps to Americanize the tens of millions of new Chinese immigrants. Always remember, diversity is our strength! Foreigners are who we are.
So, how American are these One Billion going to be?
Indeed, one reason for this summer’s mania over whites supposedly oppressing blacks is because blacks vaguely realize that the white man’s days are numbered due to immigration. Once the immigrants take over, nobody will take seriously anymore African-Americans’ sad stories about George Floyd, redlining, and Emmett Till. So blacks had better guilt-trip whites fast into making expensive concessions because the next rulers of America sure aren’t going to fall for black tears.
They aren’t Americans, that’s the point. There is no America without White Americans. Sorry, package deal, like Europe.
Moreover, the Left takes great pains to make the expungement of Whites from the planet their main goal; the rest are supporting efforts.
Not just the USA.
Where do they get this idea that North America is the place they’re going to force a lot of immigration to make money? Who are “they”, anyway?
https://www.centuryinitiative.ca/
Century Initiative envisions a Canada at scale, with 100 million people in 2100 working together to achieve our shared potential.
Think outside the conformity. Send the fake Americans back, end the H1Bs and all the rest for 50 years. Let’s see the immigrants make a civilization in Zimbabwe, Sudan or even China. “Immigration is their strength” should apply there too.
Yeah, right, a billion. Most parts of the US are already straining from a lack of water resources and/or infrastructure. And I can’t say paving more of the country to have more will bring anything good. I really wish the population were around 200 million or less. More pointless cardboard shacks and more pavement and less land for wildlife. What can go wrong?
Import the 3rd world, become the 3rd world.
In time there will, hopefully, be enough sensible whites remaining to retreat into their own enclaves. In the Uk, for example, white people area minority in London; the old idea of the cheerful cockney is gone. The strangely-insane whites who think this is a good idea will try to live there as long as they can until it becomes obvious what an error they have made, while the civil servants who commute into London but have no truck with the place outside the Westminster bubble will slowly grasp that their world is shrinking.
So too is the lot of white people on an increasingly crowded island.
More, the tax burden on those who work to pay for all the immigrants will increase, bearing in mind the majority of immigrants (especially with their extended families who follow on for ‘free’ health care and benefits) make little contribution to the exchequer.
The number of arrivals every day of dozens of MMA migrants in rubber boats crossing the Channel (all met and escorted in by our own Border ships) and given free accommodation and money is growing all the time. (I admit I did not know there were so many rubber boat builders in Europe, though how we are unable to interdict this supply line makes me think we aren’t trying)
At some point I have argued before we will go back to the idea of small land areas well-defended and even city states. But it will not be a gathering based on location: it will be on ethnic lines. Already the muslim majority in one part of east London are pushing for their own ‘city within a city’ with their own customs and laws )a situation aided it must be said by having people in authority being of their persuasion, such as the present mayor of London — who astonishingly has already approved ‘muslim only’ housing developments)
In time there will be a collapse of the UK, and it will be on ethnic lines. We have already surrendered large tracts of major cities to immigrant groups and given their propensity for violence will no doubt turn on each other, though they may only do that after they have fully driven the whites out.
The prospects aren’t good for us, or most of the western world, when we have ‘leaders’ who are scared of being honest or are in the pay of elements who detest whites.
If there was going to be any resistance to the plan then it would have presented itself already. And it has. There have been books, and speeches, and marches, and so on.
Of course, the risk is much lower than it was ten years ago, ten years ago it was much lower than twenty years ago, and so on. It is looking pretty pathetic these days, quite frankly.
But nonelite white people remain a threat to national security.
Do you have any family members, not Progressives, who are *deeply* religious, as in, every non-functional item in their house bears a religious message, and their DVD cabinet is all religious movies and sermons? Then welcome to the 22nd century.
Getting married and having children didn’t use to be an act of religious devotion; it was a normal thing that most people did. Now, across Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, fanatics are making babies and liberals aren’t.
Dave, are you saying Darwin hates atheists?
“Fanatics are making babies and liberals aren’t.”
https://i.postimg.cc/XYfBm3tY/shock.jpg
“Good God, no.”
Darwin hates societies that create so many economic and cultural obstacles to child-bearing that only the most fanatically religious can overcome them.
The only proven solution is to take away all female social status and let them earn some of it back by getting married and having many children.
There may be some pressure on men to start families, but this is something men naturally desire when the women available for it are young and chaste.