A modest (?) proposal.
By Peter Brimelow.
First published in Forbes,
March 27, 1995
[Peter Brimelow writes:
I enjoyed writing
this article, which the former and great Editor of
Forbes, James W. Michaels, held out for a cycle
while he pondered the possible reaction and which got me
on the front page of the Tijuana paper (twice) and
denounced on Mexico City radio. Seven years and maybe 2
million net Mexican immigrants later, I still think –
why not? Could it be worse than the current situation?
Ironically, given the penultimate paragraph, it’s now
Mexico that seeks to micromanage U.S. immigration and
other policies.]
WHILE WAVING FAREWELL to $20 billion of U.S.
taxpayers' money as it starts its perilous trip South of
the Border under the terms of the Clinton
Administration's Mexican peso bail-out, we can't help
pondering this Modest Proposal:
Wouldn't it be simpler to go back to one of the early
versions of the 1853 Gadsden Purchase—and just buy Baja
California?
James Gadsden was sent to Mexico by President
Franklin Pierce, charged with buying enough land for a
transcontinental railroad route around the Rockies. But
American and Mexican negotiators also discussed more
sweeping alternatives that suggest Baja California was
then valued at around $10 million.
That $10 million adds up to about $180 million in
today's purchasing power. And it represented a
proportion of U.S. 1853 GDP that by a happy coincidence
is now equivalent to . . . $23 billion!
With more than 1,600 miles of coastline, Baja
California is a real estate developer's dream. They
could really create value. One way or another the desert
might be made to bloom—or at least generate healthy tax
revenues.
Only about 2 million Mexicans live in Baja, mostly in
three border-area cities. And in 1990 there were well
over 4.3 million Mexicans living in the U.S., legally
and illegally. About 250,000 more settle here each year.
So we're getting the Mexicans. And parting with the
money. How about the land?
Linda Chavez, the former Reagan Administration
official who now heads Washington's Center for Equal
Opportunity, belongs to one of those Mexican families
that never came to the U.S.—the U.S. came to them, when
it acquired northern New Mexico. "The best thing that
ever happened to us," she says flatly.
And Chavez guesses that Baja Californians would
agree, if they ever got a chance to vote on joining the
U.S. And she notes that the Colorado River would be a
better barrier against illegal immigration.
Asks Chavez: "Why not?"
Purchases, of course, are out of fashion nowadays.
But in the 19th century, the U.S. peacefully acquired
the Mississippi Valley, Florida, Alaska. . . . And
recently, in 1992, Walter Russell Mead of New York's New
School caused something of a stir by proposing in
World Policy Journal that the U.S. bid for Siberia.
Intolerable insult to a sovereign nation? More so
than micromanaging its finances and hypothecating its
oil revenues, as the Clinton Administration expects to
do to Mexico?
Well, we just thought we'd ask.
Reprinted in VDARE.COM on May 10, 2002