Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
What has variously been called a “letter” and a “memo” from the Obama/Holder Justice Department was released (PDF) last week in effect ordering public schools, in the name of the law, to permit black and Hispanic students to break rules and even laws with impunity, while punishing white and Asian students for the same violations and crimes.
[The first page of the DOJ memo comes with this “Notice Of Language Assistance” although the people it’s addressed to are supposed to be American educational bureaucrats]
The administration of student discipline can result in unlawful discrimination based on race…if a policy is neutral on its face— meaning that the policy itself does not mention race—and is administered in an evenhanded manner but has a disparate impact, i.e., a disproportionate and unjustified effect on students of a particular race.
Emphasis added. “Disparate impact” is an anti-scientific phrase which institutionalizes the dogma that there are no racial differences in behavior. It has been enshrined in rogue court decisions by racial socialist judges.
The Obama/ Holder letter cites fraudulent “scholarship” that asserts
Immigration lawyer Angelo Paparelli (pictured above right with Rep. Luis Gutierrez ) is leading the fight for an expansion of the Obama Regime’s Administrative Amnesty. In so doing, he proves himself an oath-breaker, an apologist for law-breaking, and an enemy of the Constitution—a full-fledged member of what VDARE.com calls “The Treason Lobby.”
As an attorney, Paparelli must have taken the oath that all attorneys take upon admission to the California state bar:
I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of an attorney and counselor-at-law to the best of my knowledge and ability.
The California Business and Professions Code § 6068 begins:
It is the duty of an attorney to do all of the following: a) To support the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this state.
It is a sad state of affairs when a non-attorney must point out that the Constitution entrusts the legislative power to Congress, not to the President. But Paparelli’s most recent screed is an open attack on the Constitution, and a demand that Barack Hussein Obama impose an amnesty for 20 million illegal aliens by fiat:
We are also little amused about promises broken, like the one where a newly elected President would address comprehensive immigration reform during his first year in office. When it comes to immigration, the President's effort might better be dubbed, IfOnlyObamaCared. To be sure, he's tried the bully pulpit with no tangible success in the recalcitrant House.
ParoleInPlace -The Immigration PIPsqueak That Could Help Solve the Biggest Obstacle To Comprehensive Immigration Reform, by Angelo Paparelli, ILW.com November 18, 2013
According to Paparelli, the President has broken a promise by not forcing the legislature to do what he wants. Paparelli would prefer the President to overturn the Constitution for the benefit of 20 million illegal aliens.
Of course, Paparelli has reasons—but they are culpable reasons.
The attorney’s code states that a lawyer’s duty is:
(c) To counsel or maintain those actions, proceedings, or defenses only as appear to him or her legal or just, except the defense of a person charged with a public offense. [California Business And Professions Code. Section 6060-6069]
An attorney is also told
(g) Not to encourage either the commencement or the continuance of an action or proceeding from any corrupt motive of passion or interest. [Emphases added throughout]
Here Paparelli is doubly guilty. His practice is immigration law
National Data | December Employment: Half Total Job Growth Needed To Absorb Last Month’s Immigration
So much for consensus.
Months of accelerating employment growth, lower unemployment claims and, more recently, indications that GDP is growing at a rate not seen since before the Great Recession, had convinced most economists that the worm had decisively turned. Many expected December’s job creation figure to be the largest since the Fall of 2008.
But in fact a mere 74,000 jobs were created in December—the smallest gain in three years. Snow and an unusually short Christmas retail season undoubtedly distorted the results. But long-term trends were not exactly encouraging.
For example: the labor force participation rate (LPR). It fell to 62.6% in December 2013, the lowest level in 35 years. This means that only 62.6 of every 100 working-age adults was actually working or looking for work in December.
A year ago, in December 2012, 63.4 of every 100 adults was in the labor force.
The U.S. labor force shrank by a whopping 496,000 in the past 12 months. Retirement of aging Baby Boomers is often cited as a reason for the decline, but LPRs for people under 55 also dropped sharply over the last year. For them it’s a matter of discouragement caused by a still weak labor market.
For whatever reasons, native-born Americans bore the entire brunt of last year’s labor force decline.
From December 2012 to December 2013:
- The total labor force declined by 496,000, or by 0.32%
- The native-born American labor force fell by 677,000, or by 0.52%
- Foreign-born labor force rose by 181,000, or by 0.72%
Note that labor force participation rates fell for both immigrants and native-born Americans in 2013. But the immigrant labor force grew because immigrant population growth more than offset the decline in immigrant LPRs. Native-born American population growth did not reach that threshold.
Politicians may not care much about plummeting participation rates. In fact, they may like the idea that lower LPRs can push unemployment rates down even when job growth is weak. That is exactly what happened in December: the unemployment rate fell three ticks, to 6.7%, the first time it’s been below 7.0% in 60 months.
December was the third consecutive month in which the immigrant share of total U.S. employment declined:
- Total employment rose by 143,000, or by 0.10%
- Native-born American employment rose by 235,000, or by 0.20%
- Foreign-born employment fell by 92,000, or by 0.39%
But this blip does not alter what looks to be the chief legacy of Barack Obama: the displacement of native-born American workers by immigrants.
We chart this trend in our New VDARE.com American Worker Displacement Index (NVDAWDI). It tracks
John Derbyshire: The ECONOMIST Calls Europeans To Their Duty: Vote For Immigration! Enrich The Global Elite!
A specter is haunting Europe: the specter of Pierre Poujade.
Before he was a specter, Monsieur Poujade was a live human being, a citizen of France. He departed this vale of tears in August 2003, aged 82, leaving behind his specter and an abstract noun: Poujadism.
Poujadism, n.— a conservative reactionary movement to protect the business interests of small traders [Dictionary.com]
Actually, that’s not quite right. It makes Poujadism sound too narrow. The movement M. Poujade led in mid-1950s France was more broadly populist: patriotic, culturally conservative, hostile to taxation, high finance, and to what Poujade called “the vampire state.” It was a movement of the countryside and small towns, contemptuous of metropolitan elites.
It was some other things, too, being of its time and place. It was, for example, both anti-communist and anti-American. Poujadists also supported France’s colonial rule in Africa and the Caribbean. (French Indo-China was lost while the Poujadist movement was still organizing itself, to the degree it ever did organize itself.)
The main appeal of Poujadism, though, was to middle- and lower-middle-class citizens who wanted to live in an orderly state with its culture, traditions, and demography intact, under not too much government.
Poujadism soon succumbed to the usual third party ailments, listed by The Economist in its 2003 obituary of M. Poujade as “bickering, indiscipline and lack of experience.” (Though The Economist tagged these ailments as afflicting “many extremist parties,” without telling us in what aspect the Poujadists were extreme.)
Charles de Gaulle stole the Poujadists’ nationalist clothes, while deftly extricating France from Algeria. Other Poujadist positions were woven into the fabric of Gaullism as practiced by later conservative French leaders like George Pompidou and Jacques Chirac.
The main legacy of Poujadism today: it attracted Jean-Marie Le Pen into politics. Le Pen was elected to parliament in 1956, at age 28, on the Poujadist ticket. In 1972 he founded his own party, the National Front (FN). In 2011 he yielded leadership of the FN to his daughter
See also National Data | Another Lesson From 1965: More Immigrants=More Poverty, by Edwin S. Rubenstein
One Annie Lowrey has proclaimed on the front page of the New York Times that "50 Years Later, War on Poverty Is a Mixed Bag." [January 5, 2014]. Miss Lowrey turns out to be 29. I knew she had to be young because she doesn’t mention the dramatic, unplanned surge in low-skilled immigration that has occurred since 1965, with tens of millions of legal and illegal immigrants swarming the nation’s unguarded borders.
(In fact, none of the Main Stream Media pieces I’ve seen on the War On Poverty so far have mentioned immigration. Here’s
Zuckerberg,Koch, Adelson: Billionaires for Open Borders. H/T Mother Jones
With Main Stream Media cheerleading for the Amnesty/ Immigration Surge legislation back to the heights of a year ago, and with another Boehner betrayal being widely expected, an important and encouraging development has occurred. FAIR (the Federation For American Immigration Reform), the wealthiest and least effective Inside-The-Beltway Immigration restraint outfit, has broken ranks and denounced the influence of Treason Lobby Plutocrats on the GOP Leadership. This topic had previously been mysteriously taboo.
Ira Mehlmans’ essay Will House Republicans Follow the Money or Their Consciences on Immigration in 2014? Townhall.com Jan 05 2014 is a fine statement of the ugly reality
“Follow the money.” It’s still the surest way to trace the roots of a political disaster: Watergate, the S&L crisis, the mortgage meltdown, Obamacare, and just about every other avoidable mess that has shaken this nation over the past half century.
It will also be the surest way to trace the next political disaster if John Boehner and his inner circle of House Republican leaders decide to force through a package of immigration bills that include amnesty for illegal aliens, and massive increases in future immigration. The primary reason why Boehner and company might move on immigration in 2014 – perhaps the only reason – is money: lots and lots of it.
Vastly expanding access to new foreign workers at a time when more than 20 million Americans are either unemployed or underemployed, and millions more find themselves downwardly mobile, would pound the final nail in the coffin of our once robust middle class.
…that sort of immigration “reform” is exactly what business interests in the United States are demanding…Having invested heavily in winning approval by the Senate for S.744, the so-called Gang of Eight bill, these interests are likely to spare no expense to get the House to follow suit.
Mehlman prudently emphasizes the iniquitous role of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, saying they are
Asserting de facto ownership of the party
but in a subsequent sentence discreetly indicates he knows the true situation
With Republicans tying themselves in knots over the Democrats' destructive, but superficially appealing, demand that unemployment benefits be extended to two and a half years, I return to my suggestion that Republicans stop playing defense and go on offense.
For every issue that MSNBC loves to prattle on about, gloating that it will cost Republicans this or that demographic, there's an equivalent issue to use against the Democrats. (The difference is: Our proposals would actually be good for the country.)
In addition to my repeated suggestion that Republicans introduce bills to institutionalize the dangerous mentally ill and force the Democrats to defend the right of psychos to crap in libraries and shoot up schools, Republicans should take the public's side on immigration.
Democrats love to pretend their sucking up to illegals is all upside for them, but that's because they lie even when taking polls.
Liberals will claim that 99 percent of Americans favor national health care after taking a poll that asks: "Do you support Americans being nice to one another?"
WAIT! THAT'S NOT A POLL ABOUT NATIONAL HEALTH CARE!
It's the same thing. The government providing free health care to everyone is just being nice.
Similarly, the immigration polls triumphantly brandished by the media ask about positions no one holds, no politician has proposed and no bills would require. Polls are irrelevant if you lie to the people being polled.
Most immigration polls are variations on the one taken by the liberal Brookings Institution last March. Although it has been endlessly cited for allegedly showing that a majority of Americans support amnesty, the poll never asked about amnesty, or any real policy.
Rather, the poll gave respondents only two options, neither of which have been proposed by either political party or are up for a vote anywhere in America.
The options were:
"The best way to solve the country's illegal immigration problem is to secure our borders and arrest and deport all those who are here illegally";
"The best way to solve the country's illegal immigration problem is to both secure our borders and provide an earned path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the U.S."
Neither of those choices describes the position of anyone on either side of the immigration debate. Amnesty proponents have no intention of either securing the border or making illegals do anything to "earn" citizenship. Meanwhile, not a single amnesty opponent has proposed any program to "arrest and deport" illegals.
But amnesty proponents turn around and cite this fraudulent
Greece took over the presidency of the European Union on New Year’s Day. For the next 6 months, Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras will be the EU head, at least nominally. But back on his home ground, things are tougher: European elections will be held May 22 and his center-right New Democracy party is not only facing the possibility of a high-polling party on its left, SYRIZA, but also the surprising fact that, on its right, the nationalist, anti-immigration party Golden Dawn refuses to go away.
This is not because the Greek government hasn’t tried to make Golden Dawn go away—its unprecedented crackdown last fall verged on hard totalitarianism. And currently Athens is boiling with rumors about yet more new laws limiting or banning the party or prohibiting some of its best-known members from running for office.
But Golden Dawn still seems to have pretty decent chance of winning Athens, the Greek capital, in the municipal elections also held May 22. And the Euro-elections, currently scaring politicians all around Europe because voters use them as a chance to blow off protest steam, could give GD a vote even higher than what it might get in a national election.
More than ever after the murder of two of its young members in November—still unsolved, although a Leftist terrorist group claimed credit—Golden Dawn is surprising everyone with its opinion poll strength. It's a situation unique in the whole Western World: a party whose leader and Members of Parliament are in jail, and whose members have been murdered and persecuted, still achieves third place in the polls, scoring in the 7%-10% range.
After the government crackdown, the Greek Left is trying to reclaim the streets. With the police making it “criminal” for Golden Dawn members to organize almost any event or have any kind of weapons even for self-defense, the Left has been given a clear field to challenge the grassroots character of GD. But its efforts have merely emphasized the chasm in Greek society and highlighted why GD remains popular, especially among the middle class.
Thus one such Leftist effort was a play performed after the crackdown in Agios Panteleimonas Square (St. Panteleimon’s Square). Accompanied by MPs from the leftist SYRIZA Party, a group of performers, bused in from outside, staged a show that Greek’s Main Stream Media then fawned upon, with headlines like “Culture returns to Agios Panteleimonas.” Naturally the MSM neglected to mention the hundreds of policemen cordoning off the area in case anyone objected to this “anti-racist flowering of civilization.”
But why was Agios Panteleimonas considered so important that it deserved this absurd ceremony of PC purification?
The area was one of the old middle-class neighborhoods in the center of Athens. During the 1990s, it suffered a series of blows. First, a wave of immigration from the Balkan countries arrived. Then, Africans and Asians came. Hordes of Third World immigrants were being dumped there by the organized gangs smuggling them in
The neighborhood quickly became the site for the main Afghan ghetto,
Here's a typical sob story reportorial from the Boston Globe about how illegal aliens from Mexico have swamped a perfectly innocent town in central Washington State and are really, really hurt because the mean old GOP won't let them have citizenship:
MATTAWA, Wash. – Eloy Cervantes, a cattle rancher and father of four, has staked his family’s future on this remote farming city in America’s apple country — a city riddled by troubles he wishes he could help fix. Teen pregnancy. Grating poverty. And violent gangs that shot bullet holes into his neighbors’ trailers.
But Cervantes is not a US citizen, so he is powerless to change a thing. In fact, the majority of people in this American town hundreds of miles from the southern border are not American citizens. Mattawa’s longtime mayor, a white woman in a town of 4,400 mostly Latino residents, won the last election with a grand total of 37 votes.
Immigration puts small town on cultural divide| America’s immigration impasse is a daily, dispiriting fact of life in Mattawa, Wash., and many places where noncitizens abound, by Maria Sacchetti, Januart 5, 2014. Bolding added throughout.
A white woman! Can't have that!
Thirty years ago, Mattawa was a fading town of 300 hardy white farmers on the banks of the Columbia River, which flows south through ocher-tinted gorges from the Canadian Rockies. City officials joked that Mattawa easily lived up to the meaning of its Native American name, “Where is it?”
Hardy white farmers! The horror!
Unusually, Ms. Sacchetti is naive (or subversive?) enough to say straight out what the political economy of this immigration disaster actually is:
...in the late 1990s, corporate farmers blanketed the brown hills with forests of apples, cherries, and grapes — with the government’s help. They tapped water from a federal irrigation project and some leased land from the state.
In other words, Big Ag
Leftists rejoiced with characteristic crudity at the passing of Bob Grant, the conservative Talk Radio pioneer who died December 31 at age 84. Daryle Lamont Jenkins of the One Person’s Project, er, “One People’s Project,” shrieked in triumph that Bob Grant should “Rot in Hell!”This is the same Jenkins who recently ordered to pay $50,000 to Comanche patriot David Yeagley for his role in forcing the cancellation of the 2010 American Renaissance Conference at which Yeagley was to speak. (Read Yeagley’s 2012 AmRen speech here. )
Bob Grant was an exemplar of the confrontational conservative radio hosts that the Main Stream Media loves to describe as “shock jocks.”Beginning in the 1970s, Grant steadily built a following in New York City as a token conservative who eventually emerged as a dominant force on Talk Radio during the Reagan years. [Bob Grant, a Combative Personality on New York Talk Radio, Dies at 84, by Paul Vitello, New York Times, January 2, 2014]
As most obituaries noted, Grant was notorious for controversial remarks. He referred to the now-sainted Martin Luther King Jr. as “this bum, this womanizer, this liar, this fake, this phony. ”He expressed great pessimism about the future of the country, because “the quality of the citizenry seems to be heading down. ”Finally, and most damningly, Grant noticed the great double standard you are not supposed to mention, saying, “You can talk all you want about ‘minorities’ rights,’ but heaven forbid you talk about white rights.”
Grant’s fall in 1996 came about because of an ill-considered crack at the news that then-Commerce Secretary Ron Brown’s plane had crashed. Grant joked that because he was a pessimist, he thought Brown would be the only survivor. Unfortunately, Brown actually had died.
With help from Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, the Leftist vigilante group Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) managed to get Grant fired from WABC. Though he would continue on other stations and blog and speak until his death, the damage was done. By 2008, in an example of the curious intensification of Political Correctness after what VDARE.com describes as the post-Soviet “Interglacial,”Grant was deemed too controversial
[VDARE.com: This Christmas piece is being published on Twelfth Night, when we traditionally either publish our War On Christmas Competition final article...or admit that we haven’t gotten around to it.]
During my childhood in the 1960s, Christmas Eve and Christmas were the two slowest news days of the year. On Christmas Eve the only news was last-minute shopping, and on Christmas Day just about everyone, save for emergency and hospitality workers, stayed home, opening presents and feasting. Even gangsters were home with their families. From the standpoint of the tragedy business, it was a beautifully boring day.
But we live in interesting times, and so Christmas has become a most interesting day.
Note that in most of the following reports, the Main Stream Media outlets do not tell us that the perpetrators were diverse. However, we know that they were, due to:
1. The locations of the attacks;
2. The name and face of one perp;
3. The victims’ refusal to describe their attackers; and
4. The MSM “reporters’” refusal to even try and describe the attackers.
On Christmas Eve in Chicago, seven men were wounded, some critically. A drive-by shooting wounded four on what a neighbor reportedly called a “quiet block” in the Washington Heights/Brainerd area before 7:30 p.m. (The “quiet block”/“quiet neighborhood” line is a diversity-denying cliché like “drug deal gone wrong.”) The other shootings took place between then and midnight. [Christmas Eve Shootings: No Holiday From Violence As 7 Wounded In Drive-By Gun Violence, Huffington Post, last updated 12/25/2012 2:13 pm EST.]
Reader BumbleBee2013 snarked, “Other than that, how are the holidays going?”
- Newark, New Jersey
On Christmas Day, an 15-year-old Newark resident, who remains unnamed due to his age, allegedly murdered Zainee Hailey, 13, and Kasson Morman, 15; and wounded a third teenager, while trying to kill a fourth person, whom the killer completely missed. [Newark violence ensnares teenage victims and suspects by Lisa Evers, Fox 5 News, last updated Dec 31, 2013 6:47 P.M. EST.]
- Casa Grande, Arizona
On Christmas Day, Connie Villa, 35, of Casa Grande, Arizona, attempted to murder all four of her children. Villa forced the younger children (3, 5, and 8) to ingest opiates in an attempt to poison them. When her eldest child refused to take the drugs, Villa suffocated her with her own hands. Villa also lured her ex-husband, Adam Villa, 33, to the house, where she repeatedly stabbed him. Mr. Villa escaped,
In 1911, Ambrose Bierce defined a lawyer as “one skilled in circumvention of the law” and a liar as a “lawyer with a roving commission” in his satirical Devil’s Dictionary. For the next century, many less-funny jokes have made similar points:
- How do you know a lawyer his lying? His lips are moving
- What do you call an honest lawyer? An oxymoron
Despite (or perhaps because of) this reputation, lawyers need to pass rigorous character and fitness tests before admission to the bar. A bar applicant must disclose all legal problems, down to traffic tickets. Many states require credit checks. While a couple of traffic tickets or even a DUI will not prevent most people from admission, any evidence of dishonesty will.
Illegal aliens commit a host of dishonest and illegal “crimes of moral turpitude” just to function in society—even putting illegal presence aside. Consider how often you need to give your social security number on some form. Illegals just fake it.
With this in mind, enter Sergio Garcia, an illegal alien who the Supreme Court of California recently approved for admission to the bar. [Illegal immigrant Sergio Garcia gets California law licence, BBC, January 3, 2014] As to be expected, Garcia has the relatively sympathetic DREAMER back-story. His parents brought him to the US as an infant, although he left when he was 9 and did not return until he was 17.
However, Garcia’s legal career is inconsistent with the celebrated “undocumented valedictorian” meme. He graduated from the ABA-unaccredited Cal Northern Law School, a school with a median LSAT score of 145—half a standard deviation lower than the lowest median LSAT of any ranked law school.
And—to his credit—Garcia does not lie to reporters and tell them that he aspires to use his law license to help the disenfranchised blah blah. Rather, he aspires to be a personal injury litigator—the type of attorney most responsible for the bad lawyer jokes.
Garcia passed the bar exam and then applied for his law license, admitting his illegal status. The California Committee of Bar Examiners found that, his illegal status notwithstanding, Garcia had
[See also by Boss Aktuba: "Robbin' Hood"—Armed Robbery And Redistribution In The Age Of Obama]
The story to date: Phil Robertson is suspended from A&E’s Duck Dynasty thanks to pressure from GLAAD. Reaction from both fans of the show and conservatives barely familiar with it is huge. A Facebook page supporting Robertson is “Liked” 1.5 million times and numerous Republicans—even a few from Conservatism Inc.—condemn A&E. The network capitulates before even a single episode is impacted. The only recent comparison: the backlash against efforts to boycott Chick-fil-A for statements made by its Chief Operating Officer in defense of traditional marriage in mid-2012.
(Note that both the Robertson and Chick-fil-A controversies ended with a partial concession by the insufficiently tolerant party. Robertson made it clear that he “would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different,” while Chick-fil-A vowed to keep their vile opinions to themselves. [Chick-Fil-A Agrees To Cease Funding To Anti-Gay Organizations, Chicago LGBT Group Claims. Social Reading. Huffington Post. Retrieved September 19, 2012.]But neither went back on what they said. Robertson is reinstated and Chick-fil-A is still selling chicken sandwiches across the country. Contrast this with the fate of grovelers like Paula Deen, Michael Richards, or that white kid who played intramural soccer at Oberlin.)
Now read on:
The Duck dust-up is widely understood to be a sign of the escalating culture war between Coastal Elites and Regular Americans. The Coastal Elites despise the Regular Americans as closed-minded, bigoted, religious, old-fashioned rednecks, holding America back from what they view as her true destiny: stylish global popularity-contest-winner. Regular Americans, meanwhile, grow weary of having an ever-heightening stack of Political Correctness and “tolerance” policies—written and unwritten—shoved down their throats. And they correctly sense they are seeing their country taken from under them and changed for the worse.
But there are plausible arguments that the whole Duck Dynasty drama was staged (Manufacturing Outrage, by Guy Somerset, TakiMag, December 24 2013) and that the premise of the show itself might be a fake (See Duck Dynasty is a Fake Yuppies-in-Red-Neck-Drag Con Job, Salo Forum, December 22, 2013, or have a look at pictures of the Robertsons without beards).
It wouldn’t be the first case of “yuppies in redneck drag.” Ever heard of Larry the Cable Guy? How about George W. Bush? In these examples,
John Derbyshire: Britain’s Latest Immigrant Invasion Is White (Bulgarian)—Perhaps That Means Something Can Be Done About It
[John Derbyshire writes: I’ll be speaking at the 2014 American Renaissance conference, which takes place April 25-27 at the lodge in Montgomery Bell State Park, near Nashville.
It’s a warm, friendly gathering, with many opportunities to socialize and exchange ideas. The staff at the lodge are hospitable, and the food surprisingly good. The park itself is beautiful, with miles of hiking trails and many noble prospects.
Some antifa neckbeards may show up for light entertainment, but the park police will keep them well corralled.
Early birds get discounts, so if you can make it to Tennessee that weekend, register now!]
Among other, much more important anniversaries, 2014 is the semicentenary of my one and only visit to Romania. According to my passport, I entered what was then the Rumanian [sic] People’s Republic on September 11th 1964, and left ten days later. I recorded some random reminiscences here.
I have never been to Bulgaria; although once, again back in Iron Curtain days, I patronized an automobile service station in White Plains, New York, run by Bulgarians. On the office wall hung a photograph of King Simeon, then living in exile in Spain. (He is still with us—the only living person to bear the title “Tsar.”)
My base of knowledge for estimating the impact of several million Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants into Britain, following the complete opening of the borders this Wednesday, is thus regrettably narrow.
And note that word “complete.” There are already plenty of people from these two poor, corrupt Balkan nations already in Britain—around 100,000 Romanians and 50,000 Bulgarians at year’s end. They have been allowed in since joining the EU in 2007, although subject to quotas and work permits.
The Avis clerk who checked in my rental car return at Heathrow Airport last November 11th was a charming young lady from Romania, who reacted with delight when I tried out my very limited stock of remembered Romanian phrases on her.
This Wednesday the quotas and permits were dropped. There will be some easily-evaded limitations on what welfare programs the immigrants may apply for (the BBC website has a handy Q&A here), but the British border has essentially been abolished for them.
This latest opening of Britain’s borders has generated a mass of commentary. At one pole there is blithe enthusiasm:
On behalf of The Economist’s home country, we invite you to come and work here. Beginning on January 1st, you can go anywhere in the European Union. We hope lots of you choose Britain. [You’re welcome: An open letter to the citizens of Bulgaria and Romania, The Economist, December 21, 2013.]
At the other pole there are forebodings of doom:
THE day of destiny has almost arrived. Another stage is about to be reached in the destruction of national identity and our existence as an independent country. From the beginning of January, all restrictions will be lifted on immigration to Britain of people from Bulgaria and Romania. Under European Union free movement laws, the 28 million citizens of these two countries will have the legal right to settle here. [Mass immigration is destroying our once great nation, by Leo McKinstry, Daily Express, December 30, 2013.]
The coming flood of Romanians and Bulgarians is an interesting “control” case for commentators on mass immigration in that there is not much of a race issue to it. These are mostly white Europeans.
You could argue in fact that in British resistance to the flood there is something of straining at gnats while swallowing camels.
Having admitted hundreds of thousands of blacks from Africa and the Caribbean, the Brits have given themselves a U.S.-style race problem all their very own, where they had none before.
Having further, across the same span of decades, admitted hundreds of thousands of Muslims from West Asia and Africa, the Brits added a religion problem to their race problem, with mad preachers inciting horrid crimes, and the dysgenic consequences of cousin marriage.
And now outrage is being expressed at the prospect of some similar number of white mostly-European Christians settling in Britain?
As the kids say: Hel-lo?
(Nobody knows how many Romanians