Here's a pretty funny article from the NYT about how much saintlier New Mexico is than (Boo! Hiss!) Arizona. It reflects the conventional wisdom that illegal immigration has virtually no real world consequences and should be thought of solely as a test of the morality of white folks, exposing who are the nice white people and who are the not nice white people.
As you read it, try to guess the real reason why there is less anti-illegal immigration sentiment in New Mexico than in Arizona.
By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
ALBUQUERQUE — As the Arizona Legislature steamed ahead with the most stringent immigration enforcement bill in the country this year, this state’s House of Representatives was unanimously passing a resolution recognizing the economic benefits of illegal immigrants.
While the Arizona police will check driver’s licenses and other documents to root out illegal immigrants, New Mexico allows illegal residents to obtain driver’s licenses as a public safety measure.
And if Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona, a Republican, has become, for now, the public face of tough immigration enforcement, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, a Democrat, has told any interviewer who will listen about his effort to “to integrate immigrants that are here and make them part of society and protect the values of our Hispanic and multiethnic communities.”
Normally in news stories, Bill Richardson is identified in these contexts as "Hispanic" (he's 3/4ths Mexican [or, to be precise, 2/4ths Mexican and 1/4th Spanish], 1/4th preppy WASP -- his dad ran Citibank's office in Mexico City for decades and the politician spent his first 13 years among the Mexico City elite before going off to boarding school in New England; he spends a lot of time at Mexican beach resorts working on his Aztec Sun God look to remind Hispanic voters that he's not just another pasty white guy with a WASP name.). But, here, Richardson is described by name but not by ancestry so that he can be positioned as the Nice White Person in contrast to Jan Brewer as the Not Nice White Person.
They may sit side by side on the border, they may share historical ties to Mexico; they may have once even been part of the same territory, but Arizona and New Mexico have grown up like distant siblings.
People on all sides of the immigration debate have taken notice.
“If a burglar breaks into your home, do you serve him dinner? That is pretty much what they do there with illegals,” said State Representative John Kavanagh of Arizona, a Republican. Mr. Kavanagh is one of the staunchest supporters of the new law there, which will give the local police broad power to check the legal status of people they stop and suspect are in the country illegally.
But Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, a liberal group in Washington that advocates reworking immigration law, offered New Mexico as a model of balancing a push for border security — Mr. Richardson once declared a state of emergency there — with coping with the illegal immigrants already in this country.
“Richardson has got it,” Mr. Sharry said.
Even supporters of Arizona’s law here — and there are some — agree that such a measure would never pass in New Mexico, given the outcry among legislators and immigrant advocates that the police in Arizona might detain and question Latinos who are legal residents and citizens but are mistaken for illegal immigrants
.
Why the difference?
First, New Mexico (population two million) has the highest percentage of Hispanics of any state — 45 percent, compared with 30 percent in Arizona (population 6.5 million), and they historically have commanded far more political power than their neighbors do. The New Mexico Legislature is 44 percent Hispanic, a contrast to the 16 percent in Arizona, according to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials.
Both were once part of Mexico and, later, the same United States territory. But since they became states in 1912, New Mexico has had five Hispanic governors (including Mr. Richardson, whose mother is Mexican), and Arizona has had one, according to the group.
New Mexico’s legislators embrace the civil rights protections in the state’s Constitution — including so-called unamendable provisions akin to a Bill of Rights that historically protected Spanish-speaking citizens of the former Mexican territory — and often mount a “protective stance” toward immigrants regardless of legal status, said Christine M. Sierra, a political science professor at the University of New Mexico.
“When the community at large feels threatened, folks close ranks and join in solidarity to protect the group,” Professor Sierra said, noting that Arizona Latinos have struggled to assume the same kind of a power in a state where a greater influx of Anglos (the general term for non-Hispanic whites) over the decades has diluted their strength. ...
Finally, a clue!
Though concerns about immigration and the border arise, particularly in the southern “boot heel” of New Mexico, the burner setting is low.
“It’s not that there isn’t social tension between Hispanics and non-Hispanics,” said Jose Z. Garcia, a political scientist at New Mexico State University. “We just have learned to tolerate each other and get along.” ...
But New Mexico’s patience could be tested, and some fear that the Arizona law will push more illegal immigrants into the state, though they typically go where the most jobs are found.
Another clue!
Richardson gets the last word in the article (and, not surprisingly, it's the N Word: "Nativist")
Mr. Richardson, who believes that illegal immigrants should pay back taxes, learn English and take other steps as a condition of getting legal status, makes no apologies for seeking to integrate them, calling them a net plus for the state.
“I just have always felt that this is part of my heritage,” he said, noting his early years spent in Mexico City. “There is a decided positive in encouraging biculturalism and people working and living together instead of inciting tension. The worry I have about Arizona is it is going to spread. It arouses the nativist instinct in people.”
And we all know that the real problem is "the nativist instinct in people," well, at least the nativist instinct in certain people.
So, what's really going on that explains Arizona v. New Mexico? Some paragraphs in the middle of the article give hints:
The flow of drugs and illegal immigrants over the sparsely populated, remote border here, moreover, pales compared with that in Arizona, whose border, dotted with towns and roads facilitating trafficking, registers the highest number of drug seizures and arrests of illegal crossers of any state.
The estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona, whose population explosion of the past few decades has been a magnet for low-wage work, is more than eight times that of the estimated 55,000 here in Albuquerque, where the economy turns more on government, military and high-skill jobs.
In other words, there is much more illegal immigration into Arizona than into New Mexico, which is why there is much more concern about it in Arizona.
And that raises a fundamentally important question: Why don't illegal immigrants want to go to New Mexico when it's full of Hispanics and nice white people? Why do illegal immigrants prefer to go to Arizona, with its relative shortage of vibrancy and its Not Nice White People? Why, indeed, have illegals preferred states like Georgia in recent years over New Mexico?
Because New Mexico is economically stagnant and backward.
When Richardson was running for the Democratic nomination for President, on Meet the Press Tim Russert gave Richardson a hard time about his state:
"They rank states in a whole variety of categories from one being the best, 50th being the worst. This is New Mexico’s scorecard, and you are the governor. Percent of people living below the poverty line, you’re 48. Percent of children below, 48. Median family income, 47. People without health insurance, 49. Children without health insurance, 46. Teen high school dropouts, 47. Death rate due to firearms, 48. Violent crime rate, 46."
New Mexico's state motto ought to be "Thank God for Mississippi!"
And why, despite large amounts of federal spending there since the Manhattan Project, is New Mexico too economically stagnant and backward to attract many illegal aliens?
Partly, because it is so lacking in water. My vague impression is that water is in even more short supply in New Mexico than in Arizona.
But a big reason is that, with Santa Fe having been founded by conquistadors in 1609, New Mexico is backward for much the same reason Old Mexico is: all that vibrant Hispanic culture, 401 years of it, has left New Mexico backward.
So, why does the NYT want to turn the rest of America into New New Mexico?
Think of it from the perspective of poor Mexican illegal immigrants: Once all of America turns into Greater New Mexico, would-be illegal immigrants from Old Mexico will have nowhere to go! Think of the Old Mexicans!
Posts
68 comments:
Richardson has his faults. But not turning New Mexicans into Minnesotans isn't one of them.
Trying to turn New Mexico into Old Mexico is. If he had his way his state would be ten percent white, just as in Mexico.
So illegals don't go to New Mexico because it's too much like Old Mexico?
It's like slash-and-burn agriculture. You don't wanna go to a place that's already been slashed and burnt.
Heck, even during the peak of apartheid, blacks from neighboring nations went to South Africa to look for work, not the other way around. Blacks and browns go to white pastures to feed but when it turns too black or brown, they look for other whiter pastures.
Call it slash-and-burn migration.
Think of it from the perspective of poor Mexican illegal immigrants: Once all of America turns into Greater New Mexico, Mexican illegal immigrants will have nowhere to go!
Right here is why ~50% of hispanic citizens are opposed to more hispanic immigration. They realize that they're better off with more whites per Mexican. They have to realize it. They aren't mowing each others' lawns.
“It’s not that there isn’t social tension between Hispanics and non-Hispanics,” said Jose Z. Garcia, a political scientist at New Mexico State University. “We just have learned to tolerate each other and get along.” ...
Also because it's populated with a SWPL, and they never stand up for themselves as NAM's plaster them with grievances, historical or otherwise. I lasted 6 months there in my early 20's, and I've never seen a city(Albuquerque) with a larger percentage of self-flagellating PC whites and wimpy, femme dudes. It's also got plenty of cholo warfare.
The Native Spaniard population is VERY conscious of ethnicity. As much as they love to point out your outsider status as an Anglo(a catch-all for non-Spanish/non-Portuguese people of European descent, they dislike Mexicans and unassimilated Indians with almost equal vigor. They respect whites as a formidable group, but feel the need to play the victim card in their presence at opportune moments.
The economy there is devoid of much outside of Intel and the Federal Government and companies that have contracts with either. It's a screwed up, backwards, and violent place. Mexicans are on the next bus to North Carolina after they figure out the lay of the Land of Enchantment.
You know what Arizonans should do? Instead of checking up on driver's licenses among potential illegals, pass out welcome-to-NY brochures and free bus tickets to the Big Apple.
Or, institute a free bus ride amnesty policy. If an illegal comes out of the closet, he's given amnesty as long as he moves to NY. Give him a free bus ride ticket to NY or any liberal city. Let all those NY liberals deal with the problem.
Or send them all to Harvard town.
"Once all of America turns into Greater New Mexico, Mexican illegal immigrants will have nowhere to go!"
Canada.
"Call it slash-and-burn migration."
So here's the pattern. Whites take over an area (e.g., the American southwest) and create a stable, prosperous, attractive society. NAMs flood in from neighboring regions that they control, which are in lousy shape because they control them, because they want a piece of that prosperity. This continues until the area has so many NAMs in it that it is no longer white-controlled, and no longer contains anything that can be described as prosperity or stability. So the whites move out, and create their prosperity somewhere further north. But that new area sees an influx of NAMs for the same reason that the previous area did, and with the same ultimate result. The whites move on again.
What I'm wondering is: will this process end when the northern tip of Greenland finally goes majority-NAM, or could it become a circle? Maybe once NAMs have ruined the southwest, the midwest, and areas farther north, whites can circle around and take over the southwest again, which by then will be devoid of anyone capable of leaving it. Then the southwest can become stable and prosperous again, NAMs can start flooding into it again, and potentially infinite pattern will have been born.
Of course, I already know the answer: differential birthrates ensure that there will be nowhere open to circle back to. Still: wouldn't that be nice?
Aztec sun gods aren't what they used to be, yikes.
Dear adfadfasdfasf:
Hope I spelled that right...New York is already full of Mexicans, and not just on Long Island, where they do the jobs that Americans won't do(at least, not for $50 per day off the books). I worked in the Fordham area of the Bronx for several years, and the delis and restaurants, including fairly fancy ones in Little Italy, had Mexicans and Central Americans behind the counters and in the kitchens...this in a borough of NYC with a huge unemployment rate for Americans, including Puerto Ricans. Why? I assume because illegal Mexican immigrants have less access to social services, and so they must work. In Texas (Denton area), the Mexicans I worked with in construction were much less likely to cause trouble over safety or pay issues than Americans, and so were considered more docile, if illegal, employees.
Or, institute a free bus ride amnesty policy. If an illegal comes out of the closet, he's given amnesty as long as he moves to NY. Give him a free bus ride ticket to NY or any liberal city. Let all those NY liberals deal with the problem.
This plan when applied to care-in-the-community for the previously institutionalized insane having been such a raucous success....
New technique: when discussing race issues with a hostile party I like to say "Look, do you have any politically incorrect beliefs? Because if you don't, then I'm not interested in hearing what you have to say about anything. You don't have beliefs; you believe what you are told to believe by the media and special interest groups. I can predict exactly what you are going to say on any given subject since you're only going to parrot the PC narrative so, really, why even speak?"
It's a high risk tactic but is testing well in focus groups, I'll report more results when I have them...
"Canada."
It's already begun, used to be extremely rare to hear a Spanish speaker out and about town, now more common, statistics show Mexico and Colombia among top ten countries of origin for immigrants. Mitigating factor: people have been coming to Canada for centuries, few have actually stuck around, it's just too fucking cold.
institute a free bus ride amnesty policy. If an illegal comes out of the closet, he's given amnesty as long as he moves to NY. Give him a free bus ride ticket to NY or any liberal city. Let all those NY liberals deal with the problem.
Or send them all to Harvard town.
I laughed when I read that - but the more I think about it, the more it sounds like a bloody brilliant idea.
""Once all of America turns into Greater New Mexico, Mexican illegal immigrants will have nowhere to go!"
Canada.
Canada is being overrun with immigrants also.
Once they ruin America,they will have to move to Canada,We'll be constantly on the run.
Let all the Mexicans move into Chevy Chase, Md, New Caanan,Ct.,
Westchester County, NY, the Upper East side.
I'm from New York City. Not all of us are die-hard liberals who agree with our dictator uh I mean mayor, multi-billionaire Mike Bloomberg(in his illegal 3rd term; hey, maybe that's why he identifies with illegals!) about inviting all of Arizona's illegals to NY.
On second thought, the more I think about it, the more I support the idea. Let them come. Let them overrun the place. Any fence-sitters on the illegal-alien issue will surely wake up after getting a better taste of what AZ is dealing with.
Mr. Richardson, who believes that illegal immigrants should pay back taxes, learn English and take other steps as a condition of getting legal status...
Politicians like Richardson and Obama always stress that illegals need to "learn English" as a condition for citizenship, but is that stricture ever enforced? It's meaningless. Have we ever deported an immigrant because he couldn't speak our language?
First of all, what you call "Vibrant Hispanic Culture" is really Catholic Culture. I live in New Mexico, and governmental affairs here are not any worse than they are in Louisiana, Chicago, Rhode Island or New Jersey.
Per Richardson, I know him and have interviewed him a few times and he is a chameleon; when he is hanging with old school WASPy political crowd, he is an Irishman from Boston, not like an Irishman from Boston, the whole two-fisted loud-storytelling big gestures thing all the way to the accent.
When he speaks Spanish, he speaks in clean unaccented Northern New Mexico Spanish not heard anywhere in Mexico, even though that's where he grew up, but more like a guy from Madrid in the 18th century.
Quite an impressive politician.
But NM has Taos, a place where rich white women, convinced of the bankruptcy of Western Civ, can commune with Indians and DH Lawrence. Can't beat that...
Also because it's populated with a SWPL, and they never stand up for themselves as NAM's plaster them with grievances, historical or otherwise. I lasted 6 months there in my early 20's, and I've never seen a city(Albuquerque) with a larger percentage of self-flagellating PC whites and wimpy, femme dudes.
Sounds like the premise of Breaking Bad. The Walter White's of the world will either transform themselves or die off.
Here's an illegal immigrant story with a twist:
A young woman from Gatineau, Que., says she was strip-searched and stranded in Windsor, Ont., in the middle of the night by U.S. border officials.
"It was a horrible experience," said Nina Vroemen, 20, who was on her way to volunteer at a California organic farm. "There was no need for that humiliation and mistreatment of a young, female Canadian volunteer."
As of Wednesday morning, U.S. immigration officials had not returned calls about the case.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/05/12/gatineau-vroemen-border-windsor.html#ixzz0nlyYWZyE
These sorts of stories are common up here in Canada: woman clearly breaks rules and is treated as well or better than a man in similar circumstances, and yet the story is portrayed as Woman Done Wrong By Society. The details are that this stinky hippy was going to work on an organic farm for room and board. Can't do that, that's receiving benefits for services performed, ie working.
The organic, er, organization she is affilliated with specifically warns its Canadian stinky hippies not to even mention it when crossing the border as US Immigration has ruled that they are performing work. She did anyway, they turned her back, and now it's a national news story here.
"Dear adfadfasdfasf:
Hope I spelled that right...New York is already full of Mexicans, and not just on Long Island, where they do the jobs that Americans won't do(at least, not for $50 per day off the books)."
That may be, but I want New York to become 50% Mexican. Let's see how white liberals cope with that.
Billy sez:
" “There is a decided positive in encouraging biculturalism and people working and living together instead of inciting tension. "
Gotta love bicultural countries. Their civil wars and riots make for interesting newspaper stories.
-HeinleinFan
cholo warfare
I had to go to Urban Dictionary.
The Walter White's of the world will either transform themselves or die off.
1) Don't mess with Walt.
2) Does anyone know why Hank and Marie haven't had children? Marie's wikipedia entry doesn't indicate that she is known to be infertile.
First of all, what you call "Vibrant Hispanic Culture" is really Catholic Culture. I live in New Mexico, and governmental affairs here are not any worse than they are in Louisiana, Chicago, Rhode Island or New Jersey.
You meant to say "Democrat culture", right?
"Aztec sun gods aren't what they used to be, yikes."
Couldn't agree more.
Steve, take it from a woman: Bill Richardson is NOT attractive: he's fat, out of shape, greasy-haired, and sports a really ugly goatee. Oh, and he either has false teeth or caps that LOOK like false teeth--no good advertisement for his dentist, for sure.
"Politicians like Richardson and Obama always stress that illegals need to "learn English" as a condition for citizenship, but is that stricture ever enforced? It's meaningless."
A huge portion of our school district's budget is poured into special classes for "English Learners" or ESL (English as a Second Language classes) as well as into SDAIE (Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English)
classes, classes in which the English learner is "sheltered" and taught history, math, etc. in his native language accompanied by some English. (The acronym is, of course, misleading.) Most of the Mexican kids cut a lot. Most do very poorly in spite of all the resources provided.
This occurs in our devastated state, CA, even though it sucks resources from other areas. The SDAIE kids are in math and science and history classes with reasonable student-teacher ratios while the American kids sit in classes with absurd numbers.
My best friend, a math teacher, has no less than 41 kids in her geometry and Algebra II classes, this in a school that hardly has the best and the brightest to begin with.
We "owe" this to our illegal friends? HA. I've been waiting for 60 Minutes or some such MMM show to take a camera into the classrooms, but no, they won't. It would simply show how silly our policies are.
"...institute a free bus ride amnesty policy. If an illegal comes out of the closet, he's given amnesty as long as he moves to NY. Give him a free bus ride ticket to NY or any liberal city. Let all those NY liberals deal with the problem.
Or send them all to Harvard town."
I laughed when I read that - but the more I think about it, the more it sounds like a bloody brilliant idea.
Call it the Greek Way. That's what Greeks do with their illegals: Send them to other parts of EU. Since EU demands that its members take in lots of illegals, Greek figure 'okay, we'll send them to Germany and Sweden.'
It would simply show how silly our policies are.
Our policies aren't silly, or even insane - our policies are suicidal.
"New York is already full of Mexicans..." It sure is, man. In my part of the Bronx, they are clearly the fastest-growing group -- 25 years ago there were none -- and will dominate the neighborhood in about 15 years.
All of the small store owners -- Korean, Italian, Turkish etc. have Mexican help, and I have seen them go into their pockets and peel off the $20s as the employees' shift ends. So much for saving social security and other harebrained schemes. Obviously, this is a big advantage for Mexicans as employees, although other immigrants, including Albanians and Italians, are also working in the shadow economy.
The Mexicans I deal with daily are hardworking, courteous and family oriented. I used to speak their language nearly fluently so I probably get a break, although they seem to relate well to all of the area's vibrant customer base.
They stay apart from Dominicans and PRs. There is a Mexican gang in start-up mode although the neighborhood is not really ganged up. We're obviously getting a select sample -- in NY they don't feel as if they're on their land as they do in California and Arizona. We'll see if their good behavior continues as they come to dominate, although even now the economic downside is obvious as many are consuming services -- medical, educational etc. -- without paying federal or state taxes.
New Mexico allows illegal residents to obtain driver’s licenses as a public safety measure.
Any effort to take away government handouts (incl. driver's licenses) to illegal immigrants is always opposed using an argument that assumes all of our enforcement efforts will fail.
They're going to be here anyway: so they should get mortgages.
They're going to be here anyway: so they should get in-state tuition.
They're going to be here anyway: so they're kids should get free education.
They're going to be here anyway: so they should be able to have a driver's license. (The DL issue is often justified by saying we also want to make sure they have insurance, but insurance is tied to the car, not to the possession of a DL.)
As for Hispanic opposition to immigration enforcement: if it makes a white person a racist for being opposed to more people coming here (illegally) who are not like them, then those in favor of not enforcing the law because the illegals look like them are also racist.
Gotta laugh at the description of Taos and White Yuppie Women, and Breaking Bad (hmmm ... beloved of the same type of woman).
Good points about Catholic culture. Let me note, that as Ireland has become post-Catholic (both good and bad, bad is that their birth rate is below replacement and Gaelic will soon be dead as a language :< ) their response to the financial crisis has been far better than Greece.
Or Spain (Zapatero DOES look like Mr. Bean) or Portugal. Real deep cuts have been made, to restore competitiveness, and an understanding the last ten years were all a massive bubble, nothing "real" seems spread throughout the populace.
Driving to/from California to New Orleans, I can say, California's roads were bad, Arizona's excellent, New Mexico's lousy, Texas the best, and Louisiana the absolute worst I have ever driven. Even (later) Alabama and Mississippi and Georgia's roads were much better. [Actually, Mississippi's roads were excellent.] Every sign in New Mexico was full of bullet holes, something you never saw in Texas or in fact any other State. Even a truly, truly god-forsaken place like Pecos seemed cleaner and better run with better highways than New Mexico. And Pecos is really, really god-forsaken.
Truth wrote:
"...what you call "Vibrant Hispanic Culture" is really Catholic Culture."
========================
There is something to that. Quebec is rather, ahem...vibrant. Also the most dysfunctional part of Canada.
"Mexicans are on the next bus to North Carolina"
you aren't kidding. i can't believe how many illegal aliens there are in north carolina.
i wonder how many mexicans are all the way up into canada by now? mexicans could easily overrun canada. it would only take 10 million of them or so. how many of them are interested enough in canada's generous politics to brave the cold? canada is run by people who are totally naive. canadian socialism is practically a welcome mat that reads "mexicans, come take over our nation." imagine if NAFTA actually gets expanded into a North American Union situation, with free movement of people allowed inside the NAU. holy moly. canada would rapidly cease to be canadian.
haughty canadian politicians are clearly deluded i think, dangerously unaware of just how much of a buffer the united states provides for canada. the US military is merely one aspect of canada's essentially parasitic relationship with america. not only does canada NEVER, absolutely EVER have to worry about it's own defense, the US absorbs most of the millions upon millions of IQ 85 "human refugees" flooding up from latin america.
"Driving to/from California to New Orleans, I can say, California's roads were bad"
some of california's highways are so bad, that nevada offered, and was taken up on the offer, to pay to have them improved, to make it easier for people to drive from california to nevada to gamble. there are also billboards in nevada which feature the governator imploring businesses to return to california. but why would they want to return to the highest tax rates in america?
Bloomberg is one step ahead of y'all!
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/nyregion/29oneway.html?_r=2&ref=nyregion
Quote: "The Bloomberg administration, which has struggled with a seemingly intractable problem of homelessness for years, has paid for more than 550 families to leave the city since 2007, as a way of keeping them out of the expensive shelter system..."
So, now that we've established where America doesn't work, namely "Hispanic" America, can we agree on the positive case? Can we agree that Minnesota works because it embodies the strength of America, namely, the fact that most of its people hail from North Sea Europe? Can we finally name the name, only a whisper perhaps, for now, on a humble blog, that the U.S.A. isn't merely non-NAM America, non-"Latin" America, but is in fact Germanic America? Can we finally say, out loud, why America is so much more productive and effective in all things, when compared to any state in South or Central America, and that is, because its people are mostly from Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian and German Europe, from whence good things come, including New World civilizations?
Several years ago my wife and I visited her mother in Honolulu. While there I noticed quite a few old hippy types panhandling at various locations around Waikiki. I mentioned to her that these people looked quite out of place, even compared to other local panhandlers. She told me that years ago the mayor of Honolulu had made some sort of disparaging remarks about how Pittsburgh treared it's homeless. The mayor of Pittsburgh took offense and decided to pass along his problem to the nosy mayor of Honolulu. He offered any homeless type a one-way ticket to Hawaii and, voila!, problem solved. Those people are now in the care of the State of Hawaii.
Despite all its dysfunction, I choose to live in NM and on the whole don't see many better places in the country. At least in southern NM the anglos and hispanics actually get along quite well. There isn't much social mixing but neither is there much hostility. The general atmosphere is really quite friendly. Even very thuggish looking hispanics with their necks covered in tattoos tend to be polite. Things are often run inefficiently, but in a way I like that. It also has ridiculously nice weather, reasonabally priced real estate (outside of Santa Fe, Los Alamos and Taos), and some of the lowest property taxes in the country. I also personally like that there isn't so much status-whoring around these parts (again excepting Santa Fe and Taos).
In a way NM would seem to indicate that the browning of the US might not be quite so apocalyptic as some fear. However, NM is heavily subsidized by the rest of the country. Were we to have 50 NMs, things probably wouldn't function very well and a lot more hostility would likely become manifest. Also, considering that something like 70% of school age children here are hispanic, the proportion of anglos which allow the state to function as efficiently as it does may fall below a critical point in the not so distant future.
It steams me no end that Arizonans are being maligned as racist for trying to get a handle on this problem. To me that is tantamount to libel.
I married into the 3rd generation of an illegal immigrant, but when he came across in the 1920s it was not a welfare state. He moved far north and his kids dropped Spanish and assimilated pronto. Even then, there are three certified sex offenders in the family, one who will never get out of prison and one who just recently did.
The notion that they just can't fight their passions, that some things just can't be helped, imbues their lives still.
Note to "Whiskey": http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=sp_dyn_tfrt_in&idim=country:IRL&dl=en&hl=en&q=total+fertility+rate+ireland
Ireland's current fertility rate is 2.1, the highest in the Christian part of Europe except for the Faroe Islands. Gaelic was dead in the country a long time ago -- it has nothing to do with the fertility rate.
Perhaps you folks mean "post-Catholic" since the Church is on the ropes in all the places you cited.
"First of all, what you call "Vibrant Hispanic Culture" is really Catholic Culture. I live in New Mexico, and governmental affairs here are not any worse than they are in Louisiana, Chicago, Rhode Island or New Jersey. "
You're right about Catholic culture for the most part. Although here on the gulf coast of Alabama where it is about 1/4 Catholic they seem to be the saner ones (although that might change soon seeing as bishops keep encouraging illegals to move here). Probably because another half of the population is Baptist. Southern Baptist culture is pretty "vibrant" and dysfunctional too, although not even in the somewhat charming way that Catholic culture is.
OK. I broke a rule I imposed on myself after Truth called me a Nazi, and read one of his comments. He said:
"I live in New Mexico, and governmental affairs here are not any worse than they are in Louisiana, Chicago, Rhode Island or New Jersey."
And his point is? To damn with faint praise?
BTW, I'm an Irish-American (or so we are called. I'm actually an American of Irish descent), like Bill Richardson reportedly pretends to be when hanging out with whites. We don't get all huffy when we read that we have that "whole two-fisted loud-storytelling big gestures thing" going on. We sorta get it that most stereotypes start with at least a grain of truth (no pun intended).
"Catholic and corrupt" is a phrase I read 20 years ago in the Economist magazine.
Is this what you folks mean?
I agree with Marc B.
I'm a Georgia native but spent the summer of 85 in New Mexico.
"Hispanics" were seriously insulted if you called them Mexican. They were "Spanish".
Just like their light skinned cousins in Mexico, they don't want the darker skinned Mestizos & Indians either.
Separately, why is that when someone on TV (e.g. Nancy Pilosi) says "It's not practical to deport 12 million illegals.", the response is:
1) How many is it practical to deport?
2) Can we start with one? Let's deport the President's aunt.
3) In the 1950s, we deported 1 million under Operation Wetback. With better technology and transportation, why don't we try for 2 million?
Probably because another half of the population is Baptist. Southern Baptist culture is pretty "vibrant" and dysfunctional too, although not even in the somewhat charming way that Catholic culture is.
Yeah, I'd actually rather have "vibrant" Caholic culture than Southern Baptist, and I'm Protestant (and a Southron).
At least you can take one Catholic out fishing. You have to take two Southern Baptists- if you take just one he drinks all of your beer.
Separately, why is that when someone on TV (e.g. Nancy Pilosi) says "It's not practical to deport 12 million illegals.", the response is...
In the eyes of Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, and every other leftist, the government is omnipotent: capable of solving all of our problems, and doing so both efficiently and Constitutionally - except for when it comes to illegal immigration. There, somehow, it comes up short.
"Quebec is rather, ahem...vibrant. Also the most dysfunctional part of Canada."
Hardly, it's actually the only interesting place in Canada. And the Maritimes are far more dysfunctional.
Quebec also has far fewer NAMs than Vancouver or Toronto, much better quality of life.
"...what you call "Vibrant Hispanic Culture" is really Catholic Culture."
Yes, just like those places of well-known social and governmental dysfunction: Austria, Bavaria, and Hungary.
Or heavily catholic enclaves like those in Iowa, Wisconsin, Wisconsin and Minnesota. Yeah, those are some rally dysfunctional Catholic Cultures.
I guess Wiskey's is more anti-Papist than pro-HBD given how Catholics have historically oppressed his "Scot-Irish" people.
"es, just like those places of well-known social and governmental dysfunction: Austria, Bavaria, and Hungary."
I don't get it, sarcasm or not? Barvaria is supposed to be one of the world's most organized places; Hungary is a mess and will probably need a bailout from us after Greece, Ireland and Portugal.
"Hardly, it's actually the only interesting place in Canada."
I haven't been all over Canada, but I'd have to agree. When one hits Montreal, he knows he is in a foreign country, Toronto on the other hand, while it has a reputation as a world class city, is Cincinatti with more sour people.
"And the Maritimes are far more dysfunctional."
Colonized by French and Scots, both Irish cultures.
"OK. I broke a rule I imposed on myself after Truth called me a Nazi, and read one of his comments. He said:"
I don't remember calling you a Nazi; it really isn't my style. Fool, dummy, moron, I can see, but the whole Nazi thing is overrated. There was a guy pretending to be me here for a while.
Whenever someone brings up the oft-repeated argument that "it's not practical and too expensive to deport 12+ million illegals", I always counter by asking if it will be more practical and less expensive to provide them and their offspring with free education, housing subsidies and health care for the rest of their lives.
"adfadfasdfasf said...
You know what Arizonans should do? Instead of checking up on driver's licenses among potential illegals, pass out welcome-to-NY brochures and free bus tickets to the Big Apple."
Also San Francisco, Berkeley, Seattle, Cambridge, Madison, Ann Arbor, The Hamptons, Vale, Aspen, Hilton Head, Camp David, Hyannisport, and anywhere else where the elite and their retainers congregate.
If Richardson is connected to Citi and Mexico, then he's connected to drug money. For details, see Citigroups purchase of Banancorp and the placement of Banancorp President/World-Class Druglord Roberto Hernandez
"The mayor of Pittsburgh took offense and decided to pass along his problem to the nosy mayor of Honolulu. He offered any homeless type a one-way ticket to Hawaii and, voila!, problem solved. Those people are now in the care of the State of Hawaii."
Can we do that with all of 'em? Ship 'em to Hawaii, and have California back? Yeah, the plane tickets would cost a bundle, but it solves the problem of deporting them to Mexico and they're back the next day.
Cheap in the long run. Sad to lose Hawaii, but sadder still to have lost CA.
Probably because another half of the population is Baptist. Southern Baptist culture is pretty "vibrant" and dysfunctional too, although not even in the somewhat charming way that Catholic culture is.
You miss the point. Southern Baptists don't elect candidates who vote for welfare programs. Besides, it's not like they're invading your country. If you don't like their culture, then move away.
At least you can take one Catholic out fishing. You have to take two Southern Baptists- if you take just one he drinks all of your beer.
Do Catholics fish?
I say we take all the illegals and give them a choice of deportation or a one way ticket to Massachusetts.
Brilliant deconstruction of a typical NYT mind-warp piece.
Nations are defined by borders, and if we cannot control ours we will cease to be a nation. This process is obviously progressing rapidly.
The current adiminstration's plan is to make all illegals citizens, adding 10 to 20 million reliably democrat voters by 2012, and ensure a permanent socialist majority. This of course would be the death of "old" America. We must not let this happen.
If you don't pay taxes, they throw you in jail. If you don't turn in the census, they come after you. But if you enter this country illegally and feed off tax-payer dollars, you deserve to stay and may even be granted amnesty. Freakin' A, what a country!!!
The government could actually be called 'givernment' for it panders to gimme-gimme-bums and 'shovernment' for it shoves its policies up our behinds.
So here's the pattern. Whites take over an area (e.g., the American southwest) and create a stable, prosperous, attractive society.
[etc]
Yep. I'm hoping we get this stupidity sorted out before we colonize the Moon or Mars.
Re the stinky Canadian hippy.
Its funny how the rules get enforced when the guilty party is white, immigration officials suddenly act the tough guy.
In my early days of reading vdare I was telling an Irish girl about the insanity of US immigration policy. She assured me this was nonsense, her aunt (white, middle aged, english speaking) had been locked up for days over some sort of overstaying issue while on a visit to the US. I dont think there had even been any intent to evade the system.
Now, if she had been Mexican, how would it have played out then?
Perhaps you folks mean "post-Catholic" since the Church is on the ropes in all the places you cited.
Bingo!
Or heavily catholic enclaves like those in Iowa, Wisconsin, Wisconsin and Minnesota. Yeah, those are some rally dysfunctional Catholic Cultures.
Another Bingo. German Catholics act more like Northern European Protestants than Latin Catholics. I know that a lot of Italians and Poles resented the Catholic Church and its Irish-dominated hierarchy in the exact same way the Irish resented the WASPs. Hilarious.
The same thing that is happening in the formerly American Southwest happened decades ago in the D.C. suburbs.
The explosive rise of government entitlements and Mickey Mouse government jobs (read: gutting civil service requirements) lead to an explosive rise in the number of NAMs in the D.C. suburbs.
Result: Violent crime rose in the suburbs even as average per capita incomes rose. And the quality of the public schools cratered.
I don't understand the disparaging remarks about "Catholic culture."
My home state of Maryland was founded by Roman Catholics. But they were English Roman Catholics, and not the ethnics found in Boston, New York or Chicago.
Maryland has it problems with the Mob, but those problems were brought to the state by the very same ethnics found in Boston, New York and Chicago.
"What, and send her to school with a bunch of Mexicans?"
I remember this very well. It was said to me by a close relative of Senator Ken Salazar of Colorado. It was said in response to my question to her: "Why not send your niece to the University of Texas at El Paso?" This person's niece lives in Santa Fe, but the girl's father wanted to send her out of state in order to obtain a better education than that found in New Mexico.
I found the remark to be hysterical. I only knew the woman because she and I had worked together. We worked for the federal government many years ago. She owed her "cake" job to the fact that she was "Hispanic."
Don't kid yourself. The white Hispanics of New Mexico and Colorado do not like their Spanish speaking brethren from down under. They might not say it in public, but it can deduced quite easily.
The comments about sending illegal aliens to left wing enclaves are silly.
I live in Dallas. A few months ago I picked up a package at the UPS facility. I left and then drove back the long way, i.e., through town. I was stunned at the extreme concentration of illegal aliens just a block from the facility. I might have well been in Chiapas. There was not a white person nor black person for blocks. Heck, there were not even mestizos. All I saw were folks from deep in the interior of Mexico.
This part of town is under 10 minutes from George Bush's new home in the Preston Hollow area of town.
So, flooding Chevy Chase, the Hamptons and other parts of the country will not change the attitudes of the elites. After all George Bush opted to live in one of the most affluent areas of Texas, but he did so by having the city put a gated entrance to his cul-de-sac.
The elites in Brentwood don't care about Compton and Watts, so why should they care about a Third World invasion?
So, why does the NYT want to turn the rest of America into New New Mexico?
Because the power brokers want to be leaders of the world not leaders of piddly ole America. And nativism stands in their way of regional, then, later global control. They only throw a bone to the locals when they desperately need our help(money, votes.) Or when calling us racists hicks finally loses its detering value.
Obama is perhaps the best embodiment of this. He does not give a rats behind about "typical Americans." He cares about concentrating as much power in himself personally as he can. To him there is no "American people" or at least he isn't one of them.
They think, as Bar Rafeali said about Israel and Uganda, "America or Mexico? What is the difference?"
"You miss the point. Southern Baptists don't elect candidates who vote for welfare programs. Besides, it's not like they're invading your country. If you don't like their culture, then move away. "
Most of them would if it was a faith-based program. Just like how southern Baptists have lenient attitudes towards criminals as long as they are in some kind of Christian program in jail or have been "saved" from their evil ways (Huckabee for example). And catholics aren't as big of a supporters for welfare that you imagine. They are more into private Catholic run charities for the most part. And what are you talking about I should move away if I don't like them? My family has been in the area for a good two hundred years longer than most of the Baptists, who moved here from inland areas of the South not that long ago. The Gulf coast was settled by Catholics originally. Most of the immigrants who came here in the 19th century were Catholic too.
Post a Comment