[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

White Nationalism and Immigration Today
By Loretta J. Ross

As a human rights activist, I am convinced that examining white
nationalism and its relationship to the maintenance of racism and
xenophobia should be at the center of any attempt to explain U.S.
immigration policies. While it has been commonplace to dismiss it as
an aberration of the paranoid right-wing fringe of American life, in
fact, white nationalism is disconcertingly close to mainstream
politics.

At the beginning of the 21st century, U.S. immigration policies
are confronting a color triangle with three sets of opposing forces.
On the one side are white nationalists who want to tighten immigration
restrictions. A second leg of the triangle is formed by neo-liberal
global elites who want to relax immigration restrictions for skilled
professionals as they tighten restrictions on the secondary labor
market. The third leg is formed by the global human rights movement
which envisions a world in which people, empowered by policies that
respect their human rights, are free to move without immigration
restrictions. These three sets of forces are in tension in determining
immigration policies and a next generation of growth for the U.S.

White nationalism is the organized expression of white supremacy.
It propagates the ideas of white supremacy while denying its racist
and xenophobic roots. White supremacists believe in biological
determinism: that the white race is genetically, culturally, and
economically superior to all other races of people. White nationalism
has a vested interest in denying the privileged position of whiteness
because this would belie their claim to victimhood status, relieving
whites of responsibility for racism and xenophobia. Yet white
nationalists remain obsessed with identity borders, conflating race
with nation. The central question for them is maintaining white
dominance, and non-white immigrants threaten their power.

White nationalism enters into corridors of power via the extremist
edge of the Republican Party, but also taints every Euro-centric
political formation, from the right to the left. When white
nationalists converged with Christian nationalists in the 1964
presidential campaign of Barry Goldwater, they created a new stream of
nationalism in the United States that opposed both internationalist
secular elites perceived "above" them, and multi-culturalist threats
from "below."

The Immigration Act of 1965 lifted many of the race-based
immigration restrictions and allowed Asians, Latin Americans, and
Africans to come to the United States. This influx of immigrants re-
energized the anti-immigrant movement. Nativism helped to sweep Ronald
Reagan into power in 1980, who used his office to openly declare war
on immigrants and refugees, whom, he claimed, overran U.S. borders,
took jobs away from Americans, and caused unemployment. Contemporary
anti-immigrant organizations representing white nationalism sprang up
during this period, including the Federation for American Immigration
Reform (FAIR), and the American Immigration Control Foundation. These
groups claim responsibility for winning California's 1994 precedent-
setting Proposition 187, barring the provision of all government
services, save emergency medical services to undocumented immigrants,
and for the success of the English Only movement.

White nationalists and white supremacists tend to choose legal,
electoral strategies when Republicans are in power, because they have
influence within that party. Yet the currency of their anti-immigrant
political agenda was revealed when a Democrat, President Clinton,
signed the 1996 Immigration Act in the midst of an economic boom, to
crack down on undocumented immigrants, and approved legislation that
dramatically cut welfare benefits to immigrants.

Anti-Immigration in the Future

There are ebbs and flows in America's social relationship to white
nationalism, which sometimes tightens and sometimes eases immigration
restrictions. The civil rights movement of the 20th century forced the
most sustained and comprehensive regrouping of the white nationalist
movements in the United States. White nationalism has retreated and
then reasserted its influence using both the ballot and the bullet.
And white nationalists have often set the parameters of the debate
when their sentiments correspond with -- but are not simultaneous to --
those of the governing and economic elite in debates over nationalism,
citizenship, and immigration. For example, new proposals to deny
citizenship to children born in the U.S. of undocumented immigrants
appeal to both groups, who believe that the fewer rights allowed
sweatshop workers and migrant farm workers, the better. Neo-Nazis in
Europe and Australia, and unrepentant pro-apartheid groups in Southern
Africa share these beliefs.

While I have focused my analysis on white nationalism, it would be
incorrect toassume that their beliefs are held only by those who are
white. Xenophobia and racism have been successfully internalized by
non-whites in the U.S., as intragroup prejudices among people of color
replicate the power relations established by the white supremacist
construct.

White nationalism challenges human rights activists to create a
way to confront racism and xenophobia in the U.S. beyond individual
bad attitudes. Human rights education offers a promising strategy,
although education alone is not sufficient without political,
structural and economic change. Human rights education is certainly a
better strategy than weak multi-culturalism or tolerance programs that
try to teach people basic social courtesies while ignoring or
downplaying the structural permanence of racist and xenophobic
oppression. The task is to show people that human rights are the best
expression of a value system for a democratic society free of poverty,
racism and xenophobia. Only then will white nationalism finally be
defeated and the Statue of Liberty will again welcome the hungry and
the oppressed.

http://www.nnirr.org/news/archived_netnews/whitenat.htm

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 27, 4:27*pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:

*Sadly, WNs have no influence whatsoever at the decisionmaking levels
of the GOP

We all cry for you.

We'll miss you and your Nazi OT rants that nobody reads, but we'll get
over it.

[WindsorFox[_3_]]

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
White Nationalism and Immigration Today
By Loretta J. Ross


This woman is either precariously stupid, or deliberately trying to
make a huge racial controversy out of something that has nothing to do
with racism. I think probably a combination of the two.

--


"As seen in the classified ads:

Learn how to get idiots to send you a dollar and their SSN.
Send $1 & your SSN to..." -- DarkFiber / BlockIP.org

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 27, 8:21*pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

White Nationalism and Immigration Today
By Loretta J. Ross

* * This woman is either precariously stupid, or deliberately trying to
make a huge racial controversy out of something that has nothing to do
with racism.

Oh, but it does, it does...

[WindsorFox[_3_]]

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
On Mar 27, 8:21 pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

White Nationalism and Immigration Today
By Loretta J. Ross
This woman is either precariously stupid, or deliberately trying to
make a huge racial controversy out of something that has nothing to do
with racism.

Oh, but it does, it does...

How? By saying that I do not believe that illegal Mexicans should be
given a handout or amnesty and sent back to where they came, that means
I am a racist?

--


"As seen in the classified ads:

Learn how to get idiots to send you a dollar and their SSN.
Send $1 & your SSN to..." -- DarkFiber / BlockIP.org

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 29, 6:25*pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

On Mar 27, 8:21 pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

White Nationalism and Immigration Today
By Loretta J. Ross
* * This woman is either precariously stupid, or deliberately trying to
make a huge racial controversy out of something that has nothing to do
with racism.

Oh, but it does, it does...

* *How? By saying that I do not believe that illegal Mexicans should be
given a handout or amnesty and sent back to where they came, that means
I am a racist?

No, it means that you don't understand logistics.

Read Bratzi's illogical rants to find the racism.

[WindsorFox[_3_]]

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
On Mar 29, 6:25 pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

On Mar 27, 8:21 pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
White Nationalism and Immigration Today
By Loretta J. Ross
This woman is either precariously stupid, or deliberately trying to
make a huge racial controversy out of something that has nothing to do
with racism.
Oh, but it does, it does...
How? By saying that I do not believe that illegal Mexicans should be
given a handout or amnesty and sent back to where they came, that means
I am a racist?

No, it means that you don't understand logistics.

Do explain what you mean there. If you're going to use the old "OMG!
There's no way we can send them ALL back" don't bother. That doesn't
hold water. Either way I can tell you how to fix the problem, it's
stupidly easy. How about don't give hand outs to illegals?


Read Bratzi's illogical rants to find the racism.

No thanks. I'm not usually into self torture.

--


"As seen in the classified ads:

Learn how to get idiots to send you a dollar and their SSN.
Send $1 & your SSN to..." -- DarkFiber / BlockIP.org

[WindsorFox[_3_]]

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

PC liberals need some ethics training themselves.

I'm glad to hear how you and Windsor are for pulling out of Iraq, or,
as an alternative, how you wish to maintain the status quo regarding
illegal immigrants indefinitely.

Instead of posting silly stuff, why not make your point? I'm sure
you're a little more aware of what my position would be than that.

--


"As seen in the classified ads:

Learn how to get idiots to send you a dollar and their SSN.
Send $1 & your SSN to..." -- DarkFiber / BlockIP.org

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 30, 2:00*pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

PC liberals need some ethics training themselves.

I'm glad to hear how you and Windsor are for pulling out of Iraq, or,
as an alternative, how you wish to maintain the status quo regarding
illegal immigrants indefinitely.

* *Instead of posting silly stuff, why not make your point? I'm sure
you're a little more aware of what my position would be than that.

The point is so obvious that it's made in the above statement. There's
nothing silly about it.

Logistically, the "feel-good" rhetoric of "no amnesty, kick their
butts back to their own country" is an unintelligent (read "dumb")
position to hold.

How do you propose rounding up 13-15 million people and detaining
them, processing them and transporting them without the help of the
military and civilian police, as well as ICE agents? The military
currently does not have the capacity or training to do so. The
facilities do not exist that can handle that volume. The money isn't
budgeted. And on and on.

Simply cutting off their income is no answer either. That is again
"feel-good" thinking. It won't happen. So you can either face reality
that amnesty or some path to citizenship in some form is likely, or
you can stand with Rush and the other non-thinking idiots and bray.

And, after all, we brought this on ourselves. If you do not enforce
the traffic laws you'll find that even citizens speed.

[George M. Middius[_3_]]

Shhhh! said:

And, after all, we brought this on ourselves. If you do not enforce
the traffic laws you'll find that even citizens speed.

Ask Winnie how he'd like to pay $12 for a Big Mac combo, or $30 to pig
out at Red Lobster.

[WindsorFox[_3_]]

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
On Mar 30, 2:00 pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

PC liberals need some ethics training themselves.
I'm glad to hear how you and Windsor are for pulling out of Iraq, or,
as an alternative, how you wish to maintain the status quo regarding
illegal immigrants indefinitely.
Instead of posting silly stuff, why not make your point? I'm sure
you're a little more aware of what my position would be than that.

The point is so obvious that it's made in the above statement. There's
nothing silly about it.

Logistically, the "feel-good" rhetoric of "no amnesty, kick their
butts back to their own country" is an unintelligent (read "dumb")
position to hold.

It is the ONLY proper position to hold. People who are here
illegally are breaking the law. More times than not they are using
stolen SSNs to receive what they do not deserve or they are stealing,
robbing or causing car wrecks and the poor schmuck on the other end is
left screwed. If you think this is such an inappropriate view, why do
you go to sleep at night and allow homeless people to sleep on the
streets? You should put up as many of them as you can in your home.



How do you propose rounding up 13-15 million people and detaining
them, processing them and transporting them without the help of the
military and civilian police, as well as ICE agents? The military
currently does not have the capacity or training to do so. The
facilities do not exist that can handle that volume. The money isn't
budgeted. And on and on.

I have not proposed it, but if given the task I would damn sure work
at it. It can be done, you know as well as I do there would not be an
immediate influx of millions. It would be a slow steady stream.


Simply cutting off their income is no answer either. That is again
"feel-good" thinking. It won't happen. So you can either face reality
that amnesty or some path to citizenship in some form is likely, or
you can stand with Rush and the other non-thinking idiots and bray.


One of the few things I guess I do agree with Rush on.

And, after all, we brought this on ourselves. If you do not enforce
the traffic laws you'll find that even citizens speed.


I agree, but not "us or we" our idiotic law makers. There should be
and immediate withdrawal of any and all benefits to any illegal
immigrant and a change in laws such as any baby born here is a citizen.
Oh and NO health care to ANYONE with no SSN or a Passport.


--


"As seen in the classified ads:

Learn how to get idiots to send you a dollar and their SSN.
Send $1 & your SSN to..." -- DarkFiber / BlockIP.org

[George M. Middius[_3_]]

Winnie demonstrates the crack intellect that leads him to admire Arnii
Krooborg and emulate the "debating trade".

Logistically, the "feel-good" rhetoric of "no amnesty, kick their
butts back to their own country" is an unintelligent (read "dumb")
position to hold.

It is the ONLY proper position to hold. People who are here
illegally are breaking the law.

Poor Winnie. He was telling you what's wrong with the laws, and you
froze up in panic. Did you have a terrifying encounter with a
policeman when you were a wee little moron?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 31, 12:24*am, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

On Mar 30, 2:00 pm, "WindsorFoxSS" wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

PC liberals need some ethics training themselves.
I'm glad to hear how you and Windsor are for pulling out of Iraq, or,
as an alternative, how you wish to maintain the status quo regarding
illegal immigrants indefinitely.

* *Instead of posting silly stuff, why not make your point? I'm sure
you're a little more aware of what my position would be than that.

The point is so obvious that it's made in the above statement. There's
nothing silly about it.

Logistically, the "feel-good" rhetoric of "no amnesty, kick their
butts back to their own country" is an unintelligent (read "dumb")
position to hold.

* * It is the ONLY proper position to hold. People who are here
illegally are breaking the law. More times than not they are using
stolen SSNs to receive what they do not deserve or they are stealing,
robbing or causing car wrecks and the poor schmuck on the other end is
left screwed. If you think this is such an inappropriate view, why do
you go to sleep at night and allow homeless people to sleep on the
streets? You should put up as many of them as you can in your home.

You are confusing two seperate issues and trying to make them one.
Sorry, that's not logical.

How do you propose rounding up 13-15 million people and detaining
them, processing them and transporting them without the help of the
military and civilian police, as well as ICE agents? The military
currently does not have the capacity or training to do so. The
facilities do not exist that can handle that volume. The money isn't
budgeted. And on and on.

* * I have not proposed it, but if given the task I would damn sure work
at it. It can be done, you know as well as I do there would not be an
immediate influx of millions. It would be a slow steady stream.

That's the alternative. Status quo or rounding them up. So as I said,
let's get the US military out of Iraq so they can start doing their
job of rounding up the illegal immigrants. And as you can now see,
there was nothing at all silly in what I said above:

"I'm glad to hear how you and Windsor are for pulling out of Iraq, or,
as an alternative, how you wish to maintain the status quo regarding
illegal immigrants indefinitely."

Simply cutting off their income is no answer either. That is again
"feel-good" thinking. It won't happen. So you can either face reality
that amnesty or some path to citizenship in some form is likely, or
you can stand with Rush and the other non-thinking idiots and bray.

* * One of the few things I guess I do agree with Rush on.

Hence the braying.

And, after all, we brought this on ourselves. If you do not enforce
the traffic laws you'll find that even citizens speed.

* * I agree, but not "us or we" our idiotic law makers. There should be
and immediate withdrawal of any and all benefits to any illegal
immigrant and a change in laws such as any baby born here is a citizen.

That's more than a simple vote on the floor, you know. That's in the
US Constitution. State ratification and all of that. Supreme Court
challenges.

* Oh and NO health care to ANYONE with no SSN or a Passport.

Let them eat cake.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 30, 8:13*pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
Logistically, the "feel-good" rhetoric of "no amnesty, kick their
butts back to their own country" is an unintelligent (read "dumb")
position to hold.

*History says it is not.

Please show me where in history millions of people were rounded up and
deported. Please do not use "Adolf Hitler", "Jews" (or "J*ws"),
"Nazis" or "Auschwitz" in your answer.

How do you propose rounding up 13-15 million people and detaining
them, processing them and transporting them without the help of the
military and civilian police, as well as ICE agents? The military
currently does not have the capacity or training to do so. The
facilities do not exist that can handle that volume. The money isn't
budgeted. And on and on.

*It is not necessary, for one. Eisenhower's Operation Wetback proved
that. You make it clear they have a realistic chance of winding up on
the midnight jet to Guadalajara on fifteen minutes notice and they
will wrap up their affairs in an orderly fashion and head back
voluntarily.

"The operation began in California and Arizona and coordinated 1,075
Border Patrol agents along with state and local police agencies to
mount an aggressive crackdown, going as far as police sweeps of
Mexican-American neighborhoods and random stops and ID checks of
"Mexican-looking" people in a region with many Native Americans and
native Hispanics."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback

Um, good plan. Bratzi. LOL!

I'll fight right alongside any opponents to a plan like this. I swore
an oath to defend the US Constitution, you see.

*Schools will not be asked to spend ten to fifteen
thousand dollars a year to "educate" mestizitos who don't want to be
there, have no interest in learning gringo nonsense, and will only
ruin their stats anyway. (Schools in Mexico are actually pretty good
pretty often, since the students there want to be there and those who
don't drop out.)

But schools here suck, because these illegal students don't want to be
there and they refuse to drop out.

OK, Bratzi. Your 'logic' has me once again overwhelmed. LOL!