Pat Buchanan: Balkanization Beckons

[AuH20]

This man has spent more than twenty years warning us of where this type of disregard leads.

http://buchanan.org/blog/balkanization-beckons-6672


Speaking to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Albuquerque in 2001, George W. Bush declared that, as Mexico was a friend and neighbor, “It’s so important for us to tear down our barriers and walls that might separate Mexico from the United States.”

Bush succeeded. And during his tenure, millions from Mexico exploited his magnanimity to violate our laws, trample upon our sovereignty, walk into our country, and remain here.

In 2007, backed by John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Teddy Kennedy and Barack Obama, Bush backed amnesty for the 12 million people who had entered America illegally.

The nation thundered no. And Congress sustained the nation.

The latest mass border crossing by scores of thousands of tots, teenagers and toughs from Central America has killed amnesty in 2014, and probably for the duration of the Obama presidency.

Indeed, with the massive media coverage of the crisis on the border, immigration, legal and illegal, and what it portends for our future, could become the decisive issue of 2014 and 2016.

But it needs to be put in a larger context. For this issue is about more than whether the Chamber of Commerce gets amnesty for its members who have been exploiting cheap illegal labor.

The real issue: Will America remain one nation, or are we are on the road to Balkanization and the breakup of America into ethnic enclaves? For, as Ronald Reagan said, a nation that cannot control its borders isn’t really a nation anymore.

In Federalist No. 2, John Jay wrote,

“Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people — a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs … “




If a country is a land of defined and defended borders, within which resides a people of a common ancestry, history, language, faith, culture and traditions, in what sense are we Americans one nation and one people today?

Neocons say we are a new kind of nation, an ideological nation erected upon a written Constitution and Bill of Rights.

But equality, democracy and diversity are not mentioned in the Constitution. As for what our founding documents mean, even the Supreme Court does not agree.

More and more, 21st-century America seems to meet rather well Metternich’s depiction of Italy — “a geographic expression.”

[HOLLYWOOD]

Yep, another notch in the belt, proving that we haven't had a president of the United States since JFK... when he tried, they murdered him... everyone occupier of the WH has since sold 'U.S.' out to the Marxist Masters.

[Demigod]

Actually there is not a single country in the Balkans that is ethnically pure ,every country has a large number of minorities.All the empires and kingdoms have always been multi ethnic/religious, culturally although everyone has differences in essence everyone has the same traditional values + a love for alcohol and violence . The cause for most of the wars has been been bad geography rather than ethnic rivalries.

[69360]

Meh, wouldn't be the end of the world to me. ME,NH,VT and the Canadian Maritimes would make a pretty decent country. I feel bad for the rest of you.

[Zippyjuan]

US Balkanized? We have our differences as people but they aren't that geographically dispersed. No way. Iraq? Maybe.

[Cutlerzzz]

The number of illegal immigrants is declining.

[69360]

US Balkanized? We have our differences as people but they aren't that geographically dispersed. No way. Iraq? Maybe.

You'd be surprised. Maine is 98% white. NH and VT are probably in the 90's too. Places like Detroit are 90% black.

[LibertyEagle]

The number of illegal immigrants is declining.

LOLOL. You don't live in Texas, do you?

[tod evans]

Meh, wouldn't be the end of the world to me. ME,NH,VT and the Canadian Maritimes would make a pretty decent country. I feel bad for the rest of you.

We'll do just fine here in the Ozarks........:cool:

[jmdrake]

I read the whole article. I guess I'm the only one who things that Pat Buchanan comes off as a babbling loon in it. And I'm not generally anti Pat Buchanan. Here's one part I thought was particularly off.

We are from every continent and country. Nearly 4 in 10 Americans trace their ancestry to Asia, Africa and Latin America. We are a multiracial, multilingual, multicultural society in a world where countless countries are being torn apart over race, religion and roots.

So his problem is America isn't white enough? Read on.

We no longer speak the same language, worship the same God, honor the same heroes or share the same holidays. Christmas and Easter have been privatized. Columbus is reviled. Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee are out of the pantheon. Cesar Chavez is in.

Okay. So not celebrating men who actually tried to tear America apart (Jackson and Lee) is helping to tear America apart? And sorry, but Columbus was a tyrant. Should we lie about that just so we can feel "united"?

Our society seems to be disintegrating. Over 40 percent of all births now are illegitimate. Among Hispanics, the figure is 52 percent. Among African-Americans, 73 percent.

Okay. I agree with Pat that illegitimate births are a problem. But what's that got to do with illegal immigration? Oh yeah, it's high among Hispanics. But it's higher, according to his statistics, among African Americans whose ancestry largely goes back to the time before we were an "immigrant nation" (according to Pat).

We were not a nation of immigrants in 1789.

They came later. From 1845-1849, the Irish fleeing the famine. From 1890-1920, the Germans. Then the Italians, Poles, Jews and other Eastern Europeans. Then, immigration was suspended in 1924.

From 1925 to 1965, the children and grandchildren of those immigrants were assimilated, Americanized. In strong public schools, they were taught our language, literature and history, and celebrated our holidays and heroes.

So if the problem is people who came after 1925 or even after 1965...well Pat is undermining his own argument by harping on African Americans. And while Pat includes "Asians" in his lament that "4 in 10 Americans trace their ancestry to Asia, Africa and Latin America", none of the societal problems he's bringing up in his argument can be attributed to Asians.

Basically Pat is saying "We've got a lot of immigrants. And we've got a lot of problems. So clearly the immigrants are causing the problems."

Sorry, but this is the worst article I've read on immigration in a long time.

[Legend1104]

I read the whole article. I guess I'm the only one who things that Pat Buchanan comes off as a babbling loon in it. And I'm not generally anti Pat Buchanan. Here's one part I thought was particularly off.

We are from every continent and country. Nearly 4 in 10 Americans trace their ancestry to Asia, Africa and Latin America. We are a multiracial, multilingual, multicultural society in a world where countless countries are being torn apart over race, religion and roots.

So his problem is America isn't white enough? Read on.

We no longer speak the same language, worship the same God, honor the same heroes or share the same holidays. Christmas and Easter have been privatized. Columbus is reviled. Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee are out of the pantheon. Cesar Chavez is in.

Okay. So not celebrating men who actually tried to tear America apart (Jackson and Lee) is helping to tear America apart? And sorry, but Columbus was a tyrant. Should we lie about that just so we can feel "united"?

Our society seems to be disintegrating. Over 40 percent of all births now are illegitimate. Among Hispanics, the figure is 52 percent. Among African-Americans, 73 percent.

Okay. I agree with Pat that illegitimate births are a problem. But what's that got to do with illegal immigration? Oh yeah, it's high among Hispanics. But it's higher, according to his statistics, among African Americans whose ancestry largely goes back to the time before we were an "immigrant nation" (according to Pat).

We were not a nation of immigrants in 1789.

They came later. From 1845-1849, the Irish fleeing the famine. From 1890-1920, the Germans. Then the Italians, Poles, Jews and other Eastern Europeans. Then, immigration was suspended in 1924.

From 1925 to 1965, the children and grandchildren of those immigrants were assimilated, Americanized. In strong public schools, they were taught our language, literature and history, and celebrated our holidays and heroes.

So if the problem is people who came after 1925 or even after 1965...well Pat is undermining his own argument by harping on African Americans. And while Pat includes "Asians" in his lament that "4 in 10 Americans trace their ancestry to Asia, Africa and Latin America", none of the societal problems he's bringing up in his argument can be attributed to Asians.

Basically Pat is saying "We've got a lot of immigrants. And we've got a lot of problems. So clearly the immigrants are causing the problems."

Sorry, but this is the worst article I've read on immigration in a long time.

Pat is generally xenophobic, but on one issue I will agree. When we have immigrants, which is in my mind a good thing, they need to believe in what the American idea of liberty and freedom stand for. When many immigrants came to America in the past they generally came fleeing horrible countries for the chance at freedom and a new start so they usually accepted and adopted that idea. When most of the Latin American immigrants come in they generally have the same idea (that is what America has always been good at). It is only a problem when massive numbers of immigrants come in a seek to change those fundamental ideas. I am not saying that I see this happening but if large numbers of immigrants come in, join liberal socialist ranks, and then push for a decline in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and our general freedoms then it is a serious issue.

[Legend1104]

I read the whole article. I guess I'm the only one who things that Pat Buchanan comes off as a babbling loon in it. And I'm not generally anti Pat Buchanan. Here's one part I thought was particularly off.

We are from every continent and country. Nearly 4 in 10 Americans trace their ancestry to Asia, Africa and Latin America. We are a multiracial, multilingual, multicultural society in a world where countless countries are being torn apart over race, religion and roots.

So his problem is America isn't white enough? Read on.

We no longer speak the same language, worship the same God, honor the same heroes or share the same holidays. Christmas and Easter have been privatized. Columbus is reviled. Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee are out of the pantheon. Cesar Chavez is in.

Okay. So not celebrating men who actually tried to tear America apart (Jackson and Lee) is helping to tear America apart? And sorry, but Columbus was a tyrant. Should we lie about that just so we can feel "united"?

Our society seems to be disintegrating. Over 40 percent of all births now are illegitimate. Among Hispanics, the figure is 52 percent. Among African-Americans, 73 percent.

Okay. I agree with Pat that illegitimate births are a problem. But what's that got to do with illegal immigration? Oh yeah, it's high among Hispanics. But it's higher, according to his statistics, among African Americans whose ancestry largely goes back to the time before we were an "immigrant nation" (according to Pat).

We were not a nation of immigrants in 1789.

They came later. From 1845-1849, the Irish fleeing the famine. From 1890-1920, the Germans. Then the Italians, Poles, Jews and other Eastern Europeans. Then, immigration was suspended in 1924.

From 1925 to 1965, the children and grandchildren of those immigrants were assimilated, Americanized. In strong public schools, they were taught our language, literature and history, and celebrated our holidays and heroes.

So if the problem is people who came after 1925 or even after 1965...well Pat is undermining his own argument by harping on African Americans. And while Pat includes "Asians" in his lament that "4 in 10 Americans trace their ancestry to Asia, Africa and Latin America", none of the societal problems he's bringing up in his argument can be attributed to Asians.

Basically Pat is saying "We've got a lot of immigrants. And we've got a lot of problems. So clearly the immigrants are causing the problems."

Sorry, but this is the worst article I've read on immigration in a long time.

Pat is generally xenophobic, but on one issue I will agree. When we have immigrants, which is in my mind a good thing, they need to believe in what the American idea of liberty and freedom stand for. When many immigrants came to America in the past they generally came fleeing horrible countries for the chance at freedom and a new start so they usually accepted and adopted that idea. When most of the Latin American immigrants come in they generally have the same idea (that is what America has always been good at). It is only a problem when massive numbers of immigrants come in a seek to change those fundamental ideas. I am not saying that I see this happening but if large numbers of immigrants come in, join liberal socialist ranks, and then push for a decline in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and our general freedoms then it is a serious issue.

[Ender]

We were not a nation of immigrants in 1789.

Now THAT'S funny.

America started as a nation of immigrants; the Europeans were all immigrants and a lot of them were deported criminals.

This country was also originally the united States of America. This was 13 separate states that agreed to join together for trade and protection from outside forces; the original idea was NEVER to be one super country, the United States of America, ruling the world.

The coup of the Constitutional Convention began the destruction of the original ideas and Lincoln finished it.