INVASION: Army of Illegal Migrants Is Marching Its Way Through Mexico to U.S. Border


Pretty sure I don’t either. Tocqueville didn’t mean what people reinvented it into being in the 1980s.

He was simply pointing out that we use private, fraternal societies to take care of more social needs, than Government. In contrast to Europe who used Government far more often.

Hilariously, this was because our society was largely immigrants. Immigrants formed fraternal societies to serve their in-group. Catholic Societies served Catholics, German Societies served Germans, Italians served Italians, you get the picture.

Government Programs arose to replace them, as a demand that everyone “Be American”. I’d say that we’re worse off.

German-immigrants named a “town” in North Dakota, after a then-sitting German Chancellor. You can’t top that.

That’d be like Russians today gathering together in Kansas, and renaming the capital “Putin”.

Sounds like Singapore; four different officials languages, dozens more used in official capacity.

And I’ll remind again, in Singapore, the semi-migrant workers, who are largely Muslim (They’re surrounded by Malaysia, a Muslim nation), outnumber the Natives.

Sure, I agree with that. But it shouldn’t be so for migrant workers; that’s not necessary.

If the given job they’re doing doesn’t need them to speak English, Government shouldn’t need to require it.


Yet Kalifornia ENCOURAGES non-English-speakers to vote and even provides the ballots in their “preferred language.” If English fluency is a prerequisite for citizenship, who are those ballots for???


Correct me if I’m wrong, but In North Dakota, you don’t need to be a citizen to vote.

Supposedly it’s only in their own elections, not the Federal level, buuuuut…


I don’t think that’s the case in North Dakota. There have been a few localities in Maryland and Virginia who’ve professed that policy, but they were quickly overturned.


Might want to look at this:

"North Dakota is the only state in the United States which does not require some form of voter registration. "

I think that basically amounts to the same thing, doesn’t it?


And no culture has ever willingly displaced its native population for a random mix of assorted foreigners before.

Understand no single culture will replace existing American culture. It will just split into 20 sub-cultures of little China, little Mexico, little Pakistan, and little Somolia.

American culture won’t be replaced at all. It will just be destroyed. Nothing will replace it. Because there will not longer be a country so to speak. No more than Iraq or Syria are countries. They aren’t of course. They’re 2-4 distinct ethnic groups randomly bound to a single piece of land by the British Empire. Iraq is not really a country in any sense of the word. They don’t have a common culture. And they spend more time fighting each other than working together. America will become like in Iraq. In more ways than one.


Have you been paying ANY attention to what’s going on in Europe??? In another 30 years, NO European nation will be majority natives. London is a good example right now…electing a MUSLIM mayor.


It’s not happening.

1. You don’t have an economic argument CWolf.

No country which embraces protectionist policies, is better off than countries that embrace free trade. The countries that are highest in free trade markers, are also the highest in HDI and prosperity.

If what you’re doing is suggesting that we make a “trade off” of economic opportunity, for cultural “purity”, be upfront about this, and drop this claim that “economics” doesn’t account for something relating to economic outcomes.

2. You’re comparing in vacuum.

You are rehashing old, and I do mean old, nativist arguments, without asking if we’ve been here before, or if immigrants today are actually performing any worse than previous waves.

If you don’t make the comparisons, how do you know how well they’re actually doing? Or what assimilation actually looks like? What is or isn’t normal?

Quit believing the rose-tinted tripe you were taught in middle school, and go look up what immigration in the early 20th century actually looked like.

3. You cannot equate Latin immigration with Arab ones.

Latin immigration isn’t promoting a value system that will “somehow” replace our own. There are millions of well-adjusted, well integrated Latins and & Hispanics, a perfect conduit for assimilating the new bloods.

And guess what? Everything we have suggests that this is happening. Hispanics & Latins are quickening, not slowing, their pace of assimilation, simply by looking at how their rates of both English acquisition & dominance grew between now and the 1980s.

I don’t get what your problem is with them is. Do you honestly not know Latin people who are perfectly well-adjusted Americans?

I got an El Salvadorean who voted for Trump (and he is or was an illegal), and a Mexican, who also voted for Trump. I know their behavior isn’t deranged or uncommon. So seriously, what is your deal with them?


No, this isn’t true Dave, you need to back-check the assumptions.

Arab populations don’t keep a 6 to 1 birth rate in European countries. By the 2nd generation, this has dropped by half, and by the 3rd, they’re no better than the natives.

Ergo; this isn’t behavior of simply Arabs or immigrants, this is the behavior of the extremely poor. Which by the 3rd generation, most are not.


Of COURSE it’s true, AS. Even the UN has admitted it. At the current rate of the invasion and their birthrates, they will outstrip the population of native French by 2050. That’s just 32 YEARS from now…about ONE generation.


No it’s not:

And no they aren’t.

Just… do the research Dave, I don’t get why you don’t just take a few minutes to check if your claim is true.


Why do you continue to cite left-wingers as “proof” of your positions, AS? PRB is a pro-abortion, far-left organization with questionable methodologies.


I haven’t been shy about saying a large portion of my issue with unfettered migration is the crap culture the migrants come from. When someone comes here from a bad country, they make this country more resemble their former homeland.

However, you may notice, that all of the countries I’m saying are dysfunctional are also poor. Saudi Arabia is probably the only moderately wealthy country I don’t want immigrants from. Poverty and crappy culture goes hand in hand.

We have more than enough unskilled poor people here. I don’t want to import them. I don’t want to import impoverished Canadians or Greeks either.

You’re the one always going on about markets. The market has determined they aren’t a very worthwhile person. If you’re being offered a choice between a single wide trailer with a $40,000 loan on it, versus a 2,500 sq ft two story house that’s debt free, why would you choose to take the trailer?

We have a limited number of immigrants. Why pick the crappy ones? You’ve yet to explain how uneducated cart pushers will somehow benefit the economy more than skilled workers.

On a per-capita basis, South Americans do a much better job than Mexicans. A lot of my problems with Mexicans came about specifically from knowing quite a few Puerto Ricans and Dominicans. Cubans and South Americans are not fans of Mexicans either. If Mexico was making up 1% of our immigrants as Argentinians are, you wouldn’t hear me talk about them. But they’re closer to half. I wouldn’t want half of our immigrants coming from Japan, but certainly not Mexico.

Bro there are two choices on the ballot. You vote R or you vote D. Neither has much to do with anything. 95% of the public just blindly votes for whomever is running. The fact that 90+% of Trump voters would have voted for Jeb! may tell you why I don’t much care about that.
Most of my friends voted for Hilary Clinton. My girlfriend voted for Hilary Clinton. I don’t really care.


Ad hominem; this a poor excuse for you not doing research.

You have the self-control to check yourself, you don’t have an excuse for claiming things you can debunk in 5 second of actual effort.

Act like you care about the issue Dave, or else, why should I bother with the discussion? Why should anyone for that matter? You’re basically telling me that no effort suits you, is that really what you want to convey?


Which stems from a misunderstanding on how cultures progress, long term.

More developed cultures dominate, and they’ll even dominate when outnumbered.

It’s for the same reason Big businesses dominate, even though they’re outnumbered by the small ones; who has the capital? Who has the connections? Who disproportionally, knows how to do **** that gets mass attention?

Go read more from Jordan Peterson, or go read Thomas Sowell. They be safe sources for you, as neither of them are out & out fan of immigrants (especially not Sowell), but both would show you, very clearly, what you’re overlooking in terms of how sociological structures actually behave long term.

Peterson can show you how personality traits inform behavior, and Sowell can give example after example of a choice few from a more productive culture, having their way with the natives.

This applies to Ireland. This applies to Italy. This applies to Vietnam.

None of it changes whether it’s worth having people along, because we can look long term, and see how things result.

To be claiming that they aren’t worth it, would bring on the question of when exactly bringing in war refugees is. It’s never ideal.

Equally, considering that without immigrants, we would be in a demographic free-fall, it’s pretty clear that a need for their presence also exists.

Low skilled immigration has. a. point.

Division of labor, is something at work in our economy, and you create distortions when you don’t allow for it.
Distortions that generate black markets, and make everything worse.

Then problem solved; Mexicans are dropping as a proportion of Latin immigration (because Mexican birth rates have also dropped dramatically), and are steadily being replaced by people from further south (and Asians). PEW has been reporting on that for years.


So you’re DENYING that PRB is a far-left organization? Sorry, AS, but it MATTERS. When your “research” leads you to cite BS from such groups, it calls into question YOUR research rigor…not mine.


And still you deflect? Still you persist in your lack of effort here?

When are you going to behave like this matters Dave? When are you going to show some kind of effort here?

Where is your source, showing that the U.N. claims this? Because I’m pretty sure they don’t.

That should be a borderline move of yours to show you actually care about what you’re talking about.
And if you can’t find it, admit it.


What sparked the Dark Ages again?

And I’m already quite familiar with Jordan Peterson. He pretty much agrees with me on 90% of stuff, which(much like Trump) is a rare find because my positions range from far Left to far Right and in-between. He actually has a lecture about how 20% of the population is already too stupid to hold regular employment and that problem is about to get much, much worse. A discussion we’ve been having off and on for 3 years.

Any past example lacked a welfare state so they aren’t comparable. And we really didn’t benefit from Irish or Italian immigration. Did they really integrate? They created Jersey and Boston, you tell me. I’m really not a fan of either. And we sharply curved immigration for decades in their wake. It really wasn’t some wonderful period. It was a serious problem.

I think I’ve said several times we should not take war refugees. 95% of people in war torn regions stay there. What makes the 5% who flee special? They can do what the other 95% of their fellow countrymen are doing.

The native birth rate only recently slid below replacement, and a major reason many people are having fewer children is because you need a much bigger income to raise children now. The wages of both potential parents are driven down by illegal immigrants, and their taxes goes up to support said immigrants and their broods. So we’ve designed a system where we discourage our native population from reproducing, so we can instead bring in more foreigners and pay them to reproduce. Good for big business, but very, very bad for existing population.


Dude… that was a myth. A derogatory term used by people to romanticize ancient Rome, to bulster the idea of the Holy Roman Empire.

Ergo, it’s apart of a Founding mythos. Like the story of Paul Revere; there’s only elements of truth to it.

Really? Because he defines your viewpoint as a collapse into a tribalistic identity, and he does not approve of that.

He doesn’t think it’s enlightened, nor an answer to our predicament, anymore than he thinks white guilt is a proper answer to historical wrongs.

You can find him talking about this in his interview with Glenn Beck.

He also calls his position deference to the Divine Individual.

Which sounds nothing like what you’ve put forth here.

Yet he doesn’t, ever, at any point, use that as an excuse to block immigration. That’s completely on you.

Indeed, him trying to claim that, would be in complete defiance of his own research: Immigrants, as a population, are higher in trait conscientiousness, and openness to experiences, than the average population.

Hence why 2nd generation immigrants are more often entrepreneurs than any other group of people.

Indeed, Cwolf, the entrepreneurship of immigrants, is something you’ve entirely overlooked, and that tendency is based on their temperament, not education or work skills. Which means if you create an immigration system that tests people on the latter, it’s looking for the wrong thing, in the wrong place.

Think again:

Trump’s own Alma mater points out otherwise.

Economic theory predictions and the bulk of academic research confirms that wages are unaffected by immigration over the long-term and that the economic effects of immigration are mostly positive for natives and for the overall economy.

The only source you’ve ever given for this connects it only to high school drop outs, and only in the short term.

Long term, immigrants drive labor demand, and raise wages.

Because demand of labor is not fixed, anymore than the supply is. Your entire analysis doesn’t account for that, at all.


True, CWolf, and don’t forget ABORTION. Since Roe v Wade we’ve seen 60 MILLION abortions. That’s 60 MILLION American citizens that would have made importing poor, ignorant immigrants completely unnecessary, even according to AS’s accounting.