newYou can now listen to Fox News articles.
Editor’s Note: The following editorial is excerpted from author Jeremy Carle’s new book. “The Unprotected Class: How Anti-White Racism is Ripping America Apart.” (Regnery, April 23, 2024)
Politics is complex, and the sudden collapse of American society can rarely be traced back to a single law or single law. However, the Hart-Cellar Immigration Act of 1965 fundamentally changed American immigration policy and is perhaps one of the most transformative pieces of legislation. This country has changed from a nearly homogeneous nation of whites and blacks at the time of its founding to a fully multiracial nation today and an increasingly ethnically conflicted nation.
What is clear is that the post-1965 immigration boom was not so much a continuation of long-standing American policy as it was a spectacular repudiation of that policy. Over the past 60 years, the U.S. government has created a new American people. Democrats, who haven’t won white votes since 1964, simply elected others through immigration policy and attacked whites who complained as racists.
Given the major changes it would cause, it was inevitable that Democratic leaders would lie about the Hart-Celler immigration bill before introducing it in 1965. “This bill we are signing today is not a revolutionary bill,” President Lyndon Johnson said. “It won’t impact the lives of millions of people. It won’t change the fabric of our daily lives.”
Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe illegal immigration is a real crisis, not media reports: poll
“This bill does not flood cities with immigrants. It does not disrupt the ethnic makeup of society. It does not loosen immigration standards. I will not lose my job.” None of these were true.
Aerial photo shows migrants passing through razor coils as they cross the U.S.-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas, March 13, 2024. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)
A more accurate assessment is given by North Carolina Democratic Sen. Sam Irvin, who argues that it is impossible to create a nondiscriminatory immigration policy, so why not discriminate on behalf of those who created this country? did.
The American Legion stated, “It is in our nation’s best interest to maintain the status quo of our nation’s cultural and social fabric.” A May 1965 Harris poll showed that Americans opposed relaxing immigration laws by a margin of 58% to 24%.
But who cares what the American people, especially white Americans, think?
To be fair, even many of this bill’s supporters have no idea how radical the bill actually proved to be, and that its “family reunification” provisions aimed at helping white ethnic groups were , has professed surprise at how it has caused chain migration, especially from Mexico.
Unsurprisingly, the left changed its rhetorical tactics as immigration policy soon took on a character dramatically different from its promise. In 1968, just a few years after the bill’s passage, The New York Times wrote that while the new law’s “degree of change” to immigration surprised almost everyone, “it is unlikely that it will be amended because lawmakers disagree.” Reported. I don’t want to look like a racist. ” Even in the late 1960s, left-wing racial intimidation tactics were at work.
Illegal immigration only began en masse in the 1970s, and its history is even more fraught. We are constantly told that illegal aliens do not commit more crimes than natives, but this is also a carefully chosen anti-white statement.
Many white people don’t care whether illegal immigrants commit more crimes than current legal immigrants. They worry about whether they commit more crimes than the white American communities in which they live – they most certainly do. The fact that there is a non-white population in the United States that commits more crimes, resulting in higher averages, should not convince whites that immigration will make them safer.
By the 1990s, even the moderate New Democratic Party’s rhetoric on immigration was changing. As former President Bill Clinton said in a 1998 State of Portland speech, “Today, largely because of immigration, there is no racial majority in Hawaii or Houston or New York City. Five years. “In a little over 50 years, there will be no majority race in our largest cities,” California. [These immigrants] It energizes our culture and broadens our vision of the world. They renew our most fundamental values and remind us all of what it truly means to be an American. ”
Jeremy Carle’s new book, “Unprotected Classes: How Anti-White Racism is Tearing America Apart,” talks about the continuing impact of immigration’s fundamental changes.
Sounds like…a great alternative. Did the supermajority of white Americans ask for this? No one cared.
Political history and the impact of immigration
Immigration has had many political effects on America. Democrats have accomplished remarkable things by leveraging the polarization of African American voters in conjunction with mass immigration. In other words, they have gained electoral advantages while consistently losing the overwhelming majority of their ethnic votes. (This supermajority ranges from 89% white voters in former President Jimmy Carter’s victory in 1976 to 67% white voters in Joe Biden’s victory in 2020).
During this time, Democrats won the popular vote in six presidential elections and two additional elections without ever winning the vote of white voters. As far as I know, there is no other example in a modern multi-ethnic democracy where a party has won elections while constantly losing the votes of a super-majority of ethnic groups. This fact, perhaps more than any other, explains Hart Celler’s power in creating anti-white America.
The massive increase in illegal immigration poses other problems. The underrepresentation of illegal immigrants in the census (where they are counted like everyone else) has led to the creation of so-called “rotten districts” (a term originally used to refer to very small districts). Ta. constituencies in England for electing members of Parliament; constituencies abolished by the Reform Act of 1832).
For more FOX News opinions, click here
These unequal districts are equivalent to the modern-day three-fifths compromise, giving residents of states and districts with large numbers of illegal aliens and other non-citizens a larger percentage than residents of districts with more citizens. This means that they are given disproportionate political power.
In theory, the Supreme Court established the “one person, one vote” rule in Baker v. Carr and set the stage for forcing states to draw equal-population congressional districts in the name of fairness. Somehow the courts (and the media) don’t see unequal representation by illegal aliens as a problem.
Overall, there are more than 45 million immigrants in the United States (88 million if you include the children of immigrants), up from only about 8 million in 1960. Notably, the number of immigrants from Europe and Canada has decreased by almost 25 people. % during the same period, and almost all of the rest are immigrants from areas that previously had minimal or no immigration.
In 1968, just a few years after the bill’s passage, the New York Times wrote that while the new law’s “degree of change” to immigration surprised almost everyone, it was “unlikely to be amended because lawmakers disagree.” Reported. I don’t want to look like a racist. ”
In fact, since 1990, the Diversity Visa Program has admitted 55,000 immigrants each year from countries selected because they have no connection to historical immigration patterns to the United States. Some people who entered the country on this visa have committed terrorist activities.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
However, Democrats have been adamantly opposed to eliminating the program, even if the number of visas were offset by an equivalent increase in other categories of visas. Filling America with people who have little or no connection to the historic American nation is part of liberal ideology.
As a result, less than half of American children are non-Hispanic white. In about 20 years, America as a whole is predicted to be majority-minority. “The Great Replacement” is not a conspiracy theory. As 2024 Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy put it, it’s “just basic Democratic immigration policy.”
