That’s better. Now, class. As a bona fide Professor of Dangeral Studies, I’ve come to present a brand new lecture, “Immigration: Threat or Menace?” So if you will kindly turn off your iPods, cell phones, and hand-held Horowitz® “Intellectual Diversity Monitors,” we’ll begin.
In 1965, Congress repealed the Johnson-Reed Act of 1924. Can anyone tell me about the provisions of the Johnson-Reed Act? You there -- illotus (if that is your real name)? Kingweasil? Venerable Ed? Anyone? I hope I’m not going to have to call the roll!
Most disappointing.
Very well. The Johnson-Reed Act of 1924 replaced the Quota Act of 1921, which had set limits on immigrants from each nation: no more than 3 percent of that nation’s presence in the United States as of the 1910 census. Because the Quota Act was not restrictive enough, especially with regard to the Southern Europeans and Eastern Europeans and assorted Jews who had swarmed to these shores between 1890 and 1910, the Johnson-Reed Act set new limits of no more than two percent of each nation’s presence in the United States as of the 1890 census. The measure passed the Senate with only six "nay" votes, and many of the supporters of the bill were precisely the kind of manly men which this blog justly celebrates. Take, for example, South Carolina’s Ellison DuRant Smith:
Thank God we have in America perhaps the largest percentage of any country in the world of the pure, unadulterated Anglo-Saxon stock; certainly the greatest of any nation in the Nordic breed. It is for the preservation of that splendid stock that has characterized us that I would make this not an asylum for the oppressed of all countries, but a country to assimilate and perfect that splendid type of manhood that has made America the foremost Nation in her progress and in her power, and yet the youngest of all the nations.
With all due respect to the General, I don’t believe he could put it any better -- though he’d probably manage to work in something about manly heterosexuality, which is something they didn’t have to worry about in 1924, for reasons I’ll explain in a moment.
You understand, then, what happened in 1965. Liberals, unable to destroy America from within, decided to try to destroy her from without. The result has been an explosion of immigration that parallels precisely that of one hundred years ago -- the rush of the hordes from which the Johnson-Reed Act tried to save us.
Now, in recent weeks we’ve heard a lot about “illegal” immigrants taking American jobs and singing American songs in foreign tongues. It’s happened before, of course, which is why we needed that Johnson-Reed Act in the first place. But let’s not get caught up in petty legalisms, shall we? When those Hispanics start singing “Hasta la Vista America” or whatever the hell they call it, we don’t really care what their “legal” status is. We know that if this nonsense continues unabated, soon we’ll all be singing the national anthem in maglalang or something. Legal, illegal -- please, class, we need not return to the Clinton years, when liberals tore this country apart debating what the meaning of “is” is.
Because the plain truth is that immigrants are both a threat and a menace. Yes, that’s right -- this isn’t an “either/or” kind of lecture! If you take a hard look at the sociological data, you’ll find that patriotic Americans’ concerns about immigration are perfectly legitimate. For the immigrants themselves are only one part of the overall picture, and the overall picture has to do with our National Health. No, not the socialist kind! The patriotic kind.
With that in mind, let’s turn to the charts, which I will call the National Health Report. (If you're reading this on a computer, you may click on the charts to enlarge them!)
Chart one is straightforward enough. The arrival of immigrants is very closely tied to the growth of the welfare state since 1965, for obvious reasons. If you’re a patriotic American, you’ve been footing the bill for a lot of siestas in the last forty years or so. Note that President Bush has merely tried to slow the growth in taxes, and that liberal conspiracy theories about his tax “cuts” should be placed neatly in the round file alongside the belief that the Bush Administration planned 9/11. Next chart!
Chart two clearly shows that immigrants are associated with abortion. There were very few abortions in 1965, aside from maybe that Sherri Finkbine case. Now, as the chart indicates, there are many, many more. And as you should have learned in statistics class, correlation is very closely correlated with causation. Next chart!
Chart three makes a more subtle point, one that is often overlooked by the mainstream media. But in the interest of fairness and balance, I must admit that many patriotic American commentators have also failed to notice this trend, because the nature of “interest group” politics tends to separate the heterosexual patriot lobby from the 100-percent-American patriot lobby. The figures, however, do not lie. In 1965 there were approximately zero homosexuals. Suddenly, after the repeal of the Johnson-Reed Act, they were everywhere. Today, they are even more prevalent, and many of them have even appeared openly on television and in Hollywood films, with predictable results. Next chart!
With charts four and five we touch on complex phenomena that only a very few cultural analysts have begun to understand. But according to the hard data, immigrants are loosely associated with a general decline in respect for established social institutions and authorities. The correlation is not as clear as it is in the first three charts, because of the epidemic of disrespect that swept through the United States from 1965 to 1979 and was beaten back for a time with the election of Ronald Reagan. But our “Morning in America” soon became the long dusky Twilight of Insubordination we are experiencing now. I'm sure I don't need to remind you that we now live in a world where our children often speak before they are spoken to -- and that as a direct result, we have lately been subjected to Stephen Colbert’s disgraceful performance at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Which brings us to our last chart.
Here we can see that there is an intriguing affinity between the number of immigrants in the United States and the preponderance of timbales, sixteenth-note triplets, and complex dance steps confounding our national sensibilities. As with the explosion of backtalk in the late 1960s, the chart shows a vertiginous rise in rhythmic complexity immediately following the repeal of Johnson-Reed; researchers have tentatively identified this as the “Santana Effect.” For a time, however, control of commercial radio was re-established by patriotic Americans, and a multilateral “coalition of the willing,” consisting of Debbie Boone, Steve Miller, and the appropriately-named band "America," managed to set matters aright. The resulting Era of Good Feelings lasted until Starship’s “We Built This City,” but thereafter, more complicated and confusing music began to creep back into American channels. The attempt by patriotic Americans to counter with Billy Ray Cyrus in the mid-1990s, and then to reformat Cyrus as “Toby Keith” in more recent years, has only managed to build a few easily-breachable levees against the rising tide of salsa, samba, tejana, danza, merengue, son, mariachi, and bossa nova. Many superficial commentators have attempted to blame our national decline on the bossa nova, but as Anglo-Saxon patriot Peter Brimelow pointed out in the mid-1990s, the real culprit is the repeal of the Johnson-Reed Act, which left us defenseless against Latin rhythms – and, not coincidentally, the “Santana Comeback Effect.”Class is now dismissed. But remember, people – all this will be on the final.
No comments:
Post a Comment
We'll try dumping haloscan and see how it works.