“To find pleasure in the calamities of other nations would be criminal; but to benefit ourselves by opening an asylum to those who suffer in consequence of them is as justifiable as it is politic.” — Alexander Hamilton, Report on the Subject of Manufactures, 5 December 1791
For decades, Americans have listened to Democrats, establishment Republicans, and the mainstream media lecture them about why they have a moral responsibility to welcome, financially support, and give legal preference to arriving legal and illegal immigrants who are very often the dregs of the societies they are leaving. The result has been an ocean of illiterate, dole-loving, unskilled, and often violent foreigners who guzzle down all the money the American taxpayer can provide, refuse to assimilate, vote blindly for America-hating American politicians — read Democrats — and generally constitute a potent acid that is dissolving the republic’s social cohesiveness. It is time for a change.
If we must have more legal immigration into America, there is one way we can make sure the new entrants will be worth having. I would suggest that for the next three years we have a program that gives exclusive access to applications for immigration only to those individuals whose governments are either killing them or refusing to protect them against violent minorities, especially against violent Muslims. To keep this program small and focused — so as to be able to assess its value at the end of three years — I would recommend that we take in only white South Africans and white Europeans from a limited number of EU countries. Why? Because native-born whites in both regions currently are threatened with increasingly violent attacks that are conducted with either their government’s support or their government’s indifference to their safety.
South Africa: Since the West — stupefied by multiculturalism and diversity — forced white South Africans to turn over the country to the communist/terrorist Mandela and his rainbow coalition of moronic white liberals and violent Black communists, the result has been an unmitigated economic, social, and human disaster for the Republic of South Africa. What was once the economic powerhouse of the African continent is now approaching the status that characterizes most other African states: an ill-governed, economically sinking, lawless, and increasingly violent shithole. But no matter, the turnover of power is complete, and South Africa is probably beyond saving with anything short of divine intervention.
So we should let the South African communist-gangsters drown, while killing one another, in their own poisonous juices. But we can take in as many white South Africans as we can, especially the rural-based ones who are reported to grow up to 70-percent of the country’s food crops. This section of the population is now seeing its property seized without payment by the Black communists who run the national government. These officials also have turned a resolutely blind eye toward — and may be arming — Black gunmen who are killing white South African farmers, their wives, and their children simply for the racist fun of that genocidal endeavor. These white South African targets of the Black communist murderers are a sturdy lot. Their ancestors tamed a savage wilderness, built a powerful economy, nearly defeated the British Empire in the Boer wars, and aligned themselves with the Western allies’ during both world wars. In addition, most speak English; are Christians, self-reliant, and familiar with weapons; bring some applicable skills with them; and would repay an eventual grant of U.S. citizenship with loyalty to the republic, a strong sense of community, thoughtful voting, and hard work. They would be a first step toward beginning to dilute the utter worthlessness of that great ocean of human refuse that Obama and his party brought in — legally and illegally — to mindlessly vote Democrat and assist that party’s ongoing effort to destroy the United States.
Europe: The United States now stand in a ridiculous situation in regard to its relations with the NATO and EU countries. With few exceptions — Poland, Hungary, and other states in Eastern Europe — the member states of these two organizations, each claiming to be bound by democratic tenets, have become willing oppressors of their own native-born populations. Blinded by the multiculturalism-and-diversity disease, Europe’s political leaders have inundated much of the continent with the same kind of human refuse that Obama brought to America. Now faced with ten million or more of these illiterate, unassimilable, violence-prone, and mostly military-age young men from the Arab world and Africa, European governments have turned their backs on such concepts as equality before the law, free speech, majority rule, effective and fair performance of duty by police and judges, and law-and order regimes that protect all citizens. These increasingly authoritarian governments and their socialist EU parliament are in the process of stripping their native citizens — especially if they are white and Christian — of their civil liberties and allowing them to be the unprotected-by-police targets of Muslim immigrant violence.
From Norway south to Sicily, the native-born — especially white women and children — are being molested, raped, physically beaten, “groomed” from childhood for future use as revenue-raising prostitutes, and doused with acid. Their attackers are seldom arrested, and when arrested and sent to trial are often let off the hook by judges who claim they were only doing things consistent with the culture from which they came, which, while true, ought not to protect them from the rule of law. In addition, if the raped, beaten, acid scarred, and molested victims, or their family members, dare to publicly condemn the governments’ that allowed them to be physically attacked, they are at times arrested and always publicly damned as racist for voicing the simple fact that they had been attacked by identifiable Muslim immigrants who are the prize pets of their government.
With many of Europe’s governments having decided to become the allies and abettors of their native-born citizens’ lethal Muslim enemies and tormentors, many white, Christian Europeans may find a chance to emigrate to the United States to be an attractive option. And, certainly, our republic would benefit from white, Christian immigrants who brought with them an education, English-language capability, pertinent work skills and experience, and a willingness to assimilate.
I am not suggesting here that would-be immigrants from these two regions should be accepted in huge numbers nor — as did Obama — that they be accepted without ensuring they would serve U.S. national interests and not threaten internal security. They would, for example, have to pass stringent security vetting; ought to be relatively young, say not more than thirty-five; have a high- or vocational-school education; display at least a working-level knowledge of English; possess work experience that roughly matches known employment openings in the United States; enjoy generally good health, with no serious communicable diseases; and display an ability to use in-door plumbing.
Overall, white immigrants from Europe and South Africa, the latter now bound for genocide, would be the first groups of immigrants in decades — save for Asians — that could be counted on to make a positive and near-term contribution to the republic’s social cohesion and economy. Such an immigration policy also would show — at long last — an understanding of the Founders’ intent that the national government did not have to accept immigrants if they appeared unassimilable or otherwise harmful to the republic. Indeed, because the Constitution was written to serve American interests, and so offers no protections for foreigners located outside the United States, the national government has both the lawful right and the moral responsibility to facilitate the legal entry of only those immigrants who can be expected to benefit the United States.
- Donald R. Hickey and Connie D. Clark, (Eds). Citizen Hamilton. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield Publishers, 2006, p. 74