Thursday, October 04, 2007

From The 'Melting Pot' To A 'Boiling Pot'

October 4, 2007

In 1908 a Jewish immigrant from England named Israel Zangwill penned a play titled “The Melting Pot.” The play itself has long been forgotten, but the message it instilled is heard to this day. It portrayed that all immigrants could be transformed into Americans, blending cultures and together achieving a Democracy and building of a nation unheralded in man’s history.

A portion of our citizens were denied access to the Melting Pot dream for over half of the twentieth century, but as happens in a growing nation, the correction came and they were also able to take part in the dream of being an American fully.

Seeing that some of our citizens were denied access to the Melting Pot, other citizens deemed the Melting Pot dead or a myth and started pushing for what we now see as “multiculturalism.” Lost in this push is the unique Americanism that built the nation and elevated it to the greatness she held for a short time.

We have seen our time tested institutions coming under fire for not adapting to the multiculturalist’s affection for lifestyles previously held amoral, even though it is children that may be harmed in the process. Groups like the Boy Scouts of America, an institution that instilled love of America in many youth’s and taught us discipline, fairness, courtesy, manners and gave many of us what we needed inside to survive the wars brought upon us, have been drug into courts and denied access to public grounds they cleaned up and rebuilt because they won’t allow openly Gay men to lead small impressionable boys in the Troops.

Our courts have ordered prayer in schools and public display’s of symbols of the Religions that built this great land removed and banned. “One Nation Under God,” added to our National Pledge of Allegiance has come under fire as well, many demanding they be stricken or the entire Pledge be banned.

The very fabric of our Constitution has been repeatedly brought under fire as portions are ignored in favor of the left’s “feel good” attitude of anything goes, except conservatism and love of the America that many of us grew up loving.

In all too many cases, our Military has bore the brunt of multiculturalism as they have been forced to lower standards to accept more people for combat roles that otherwise wouldn’t have qualified. This exposes all to greater dangers as their training necessary for survival on the battlefield isn’t as intense as it could be and we end up with tragic incidents as happened to Pvt. Jessica Lynch.

Stripping our Military to bare bones in a time of increasing Islamofascist terrorism worldwide wasn’t enough for the expanded multiculturalist’s, though. They had to also play on the prejudice’s of people by telling minorities they were mere cannon fodder if they enlisted or were drafted, back when we had the draft.

A recent poll reports that Nearly 1 in 5 Democrats Say World Will Be Better Off if U.S. Loses War against Islamofascist terrorists. Such is the hatred of America coming from those that despise the Melting Pot that made America great.

During the Civil Rights struggles of the 1960’s, the fight was for all to come together where some were denied constitutional rights they were born with. In August 1963, a Baptist Minister delivered a speech in Washington D.C. that has become know as the “I Have A Dream” speech. In part, Dr. Martin Luther King said:

“I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.”

Dr. King didn’t call for one race to be elevated over the other, he argued for all to be seen as equals. Today, with Affirmative Action and Racial Quotas, the exact opposite of what he called for is happening. We still see neighborhoods comprised of mostly one race and even children in school migrate to their own race during lunch.

It would appear that segregation was quietly strengthened at the expense of today’s minority youths who are often left with little hope in hope or driven to gangs, instead of being told they must work like everyone else to escape poverty or that education is their way to better jobs, businesses of their own and wealth. Instead, many are straddled with entitlements, in essence being told they still aren’t equal and that they have use in trying to better themselves, but accepting the meager handouts offered them by the left is what they need.

As this is continually happening we have allowed multiculturalist’s to infest our government and instead of us, the people, telling them how we desire to be governed, they are passing laws restricting us, taking our property if they desire, mandating health care, wages, foods we eat, private businesses as to who they may cater to and now we even see them fabricating claims made by a popular radio host and condemning him for something he did not say on the floors of Congress.

Their intent is crystal clear here, as they desire to squelch speech they disagree with and that informs people of their goals in government as they gradually move us away from a Representative Republic to a Socialist nation.

We even now have one candidate for the highest office in the land who says he won’t wear an American Flag pin on the lapel of his coat claiming that wearing an American Flag lapel pin has become “a substitute for true patriotism.”

Another candidate can’t stop herself from telling the nation that she will take what she wants of corporate profits to disburse where she deems appropriate.

We now also see Children’s Doctors questioning children privately, away from parents, intruding upon the privacy of families where there may be no suspicion or suspected offenses, but assumptions made of the guilt of adults against their children or placing them in an unsafe environment due to the parents legally exercising their Second Amendment right to own a firearm, having a drink or trying to make girls think their “Dad’s make them feel uncomfortable.”

As all of this is going on and we are deeply embroiled in a war against Islamofascist terrorists, these same leftist politicians embrace a new wave of immigrants. But, unlike when Israel Zangwill penned “the Melting Pot,” these immigrants cross our borders illegally and remain here in violation of our immigration laws. Politicians and law enforcement are hesitant to enforce our laws and the invasion of illegal immigrants, mostly from Mexico, continues, virtually unabated.

Those of us who complain about our laws not being enforced are labeled as ‘racists’ and uncaring about our fellow man. We now have a foreign government announcing efforts to block the increasing calls from citizens on enforcement of our immigration laws through our own courts.

If the ongoing self-segregating groups mentioned above aren’t enough, we now see foreign flags flown atop of our own flag, in violation of our laws also. We see protests by those in our country illegally where they burn and otherwise desecrate our flag, with impunity. Similar actions by American citizens who are increasingly becoming fed up with the wave of illegal immigrants and who decided to express their outrage by burning a Flag of Mexico were met with arrests.

In these protests, calls are made of “go back to Europe,” from protesters who apparently don’t realize that their own Spanish heritage hails from Europe as well.

We hear them say they own our land and we stole it from them, even though it was ceded to us by The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo at a cost of $15,000,000 in 1848 dollars, after Mexico lost the war between them and America at the time.

Recently, in Reno, Nevada, a business owner of Hispanic heritage decided to show support for the Hispanic Community by flying the Flag of Mexico above the American Flag. A Veteran of the United States Army appeared and cut it down with his Army issued knife, in front of TV cameras, while Police and others looked on, unsure of how to enforce the law on displays of our National Flag.

While no action has been taken against Jim Broussard for this action yet, it is claimed that Hispanic leaders in the community are trying to coerce the bar owner to file charges against him.

As this all continues to unfold before us, as fed up citizens react negatively to all the oppression and multiculturalism being forced upon us, as our national Pride is ridiculed and thrown back in our faces and our elected officials act impotent, it is becoming clearer and clearer to me that our once Great Melting Pot has become a Boiling Pot of angry American citizens who have been pushed to excess and are prepared to act themselves.

God help us in the days ahead.



Teddy Bear said...

You my friend are Grizzly Groundswell caliber. I have sent you an invitation to become our Grizzly Groundswell Govenor of Washington. I pray you accept and I will hear from you soon.


Chad T. Everson

Moose and Squirrel said...

Thank you for your brilliant essay. I agree with everything you have written, and more. In fact, my writing partner and I wrote a piece which was published last June by the New Media Journal, which brings up the same concerns that you do. Below is the link.

Keep up the good words!


Tanya Simon

LewWaters said...

Chad, Tanya, thank you both for the kind comments. I really appreciate them.

Chad, I will answer your requeat this weekend. I went to the site late last night and like what I saw, but I always check things out real close. There is a really good chance I will join in with you.

Tanya, your article is right on the mark. You end it with "In 2007, as our situation grows ever more explosive, we must look back and learn from the lessons of the Civil War that a house divided shall not stand."

I am of the belief that is exactly what the far left Socialist running the Democrat party want. Much like the Bolsheviks as they brought down Russia and built the Soviet Union in its place, today's Stalinist Democrat leaders want to repeat that for America.

Dean said...

Brilliant Lew and exactly right.
Over the years I remember reading about various groups supporting and proposing secession from the union. Back then they were viewed as extremist or angry citizens with a beef against the government but wielded little power or influence.

Recently I've read more about the growing number of groups and people across this land who are advocating secession.
There are currently 25 states with a number of groups in each openly calling for pulling away from the United States. Their ranks are growing by leaps and bounds populated by differing ideologies and people from all walks of life.

We are in a civil war without the bloodshed at present. I fear that may change sooner than any of us realize or want.

God help us.

John Moore said...

I'm not a regular reader of your site, but want to make one comment about racism and immigration.

A study of history makes it clear that the purpose of U.S. immigration restrictions has always been, and continues to be, to keep this country white.

The U.S. had unrestricted immigration (open borders) from 1776 to 1882. From that point to the present day, the racial makeup of the United States has been a principal motivation for restricting immigration.

Please do not think I'm calling anyone a racist. I am, however, calling the U.S. immigration system a racist system. Because of that, it needs to change.

LewWaters said...

John, I'm surprised that anyone falls for this spew of anti-Americanism masquerading as "enlightenment."

Yes, the Chinese Immigration Act of 1882 was passed and in my opinion, wrong. But, research has found that it wasn't based so much on racism as it was on vote pandering by National Politicians.

Many wish to paint America as a cauldron of racist hating white boys. I read this at far left sites and Democrat staff members, and even found supportive claims by the Ku Klux Klan, who we all know are very marginalized by all.

It is sad to see someone falling for yet another Socialist tactic to bring down America. I find it tragic that they also call for America's borders to be open, yet not for other country's who have much more restrictive immigration laws.

I invite you to research Mexico's immigration laws and compare them to what they advocate for America, then ask yourself why.

If open borders loons succeed, you can kiss our elevated lifestlye, one that leftists seem to also enjoy, goodbye.

Then again, as they move closer to success, the Great American Boiling Pot will explode, and it won't only be white boys taking action fighting to retain our National Sovereignty.

John Moore said...

The Chinese Exclusion Act was designed to do exactly what it said, exclude Chinese from immigrating and from naturalizing. The next major legislation came in 1924 with the Nations of Origin Act, which put a per-country quota on legal immigration. That Act was designed to restrict immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, and accomplished what it was designed to do. From 1924 until today, we have a quota system for immigration. As someone raised with conservative values, that doesn't make sense to me. Why not have everyone, regardless of where they were born, stand in the same line when trying to immigrate legally?

LewWaters said...

John, you contradict yourself.

You first say, “A study of history makes it clear that the purpose of U.S. immigration restrictions has always been, and continues to be, to keep this country white.

Today you say, “That Act was designed to restrict immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, and accomplished what it was designed to do.

Unless you classify race even more stringently that most, last I heard, that region is also “white.”

You ask, “Why not have everyone, regardless of where they were born, stand in the same line when trying to immigrate legally?

Look at what has happened in Europe with their uncontrolled immigration of Muslims. The riots in Paris, France and elsewhere as they now demand far more restrictive Sharia Law, based upon their beliefs from their homeland, should have raised many eyebrows.

Let’s look too upon some Hispanic Immigrants here legally who also demand all Hispanics be allowed in. A significant number desire the return of nearly the entire western U.S. to Mexico, far more land mss than was bought from Mexico in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, after Mexico lost the Mexican American War. With enough people favoring that, and a significant number would be Hispanics who become convinced it is only “fair,” elections could be held advocating that and pass as the voters were brought in under uncontrolled immigration policies to determine election outcomes.

I believe were elections selecting conservatives or “whites” won by the right bringing in significant numbers of immigrants to determine the outcome of those elections, the open borders crowd would be the first to demand controls placed on conservative immigrants.

We are a nation like others, with a finite amount of resources. That is one reason illegal immigration is hurting America, not helping. Many coming in are unskilled and end up costing society much more than they contribute. The idea of immigration is to assimilate into the other society and help build it to a better state, not freely take away from it and have established citizens lose their wares to pay for yours.

In the time frame you mentioned above, immigrants from those regions were considered unskilled, ignorant and not easily assimilated into American culture, not to keep America mostly white. I don’t necessarily agree with their assessment, but that was the motive behind it.

America is a unique experiment in the history of freedom in the world. Other societies have been and many continue to be far more restrictive than ours. It many sound contradictory, but it isn’t, to keep out those that would erode our freedoms in favor of their far more restrictive regulations from their homelands.

Another example of what could happen with uncontrolled immigration. Look back a few years ago when Communism fell in the region of Yugoslavia. As they quickly gained freedom from Communism factions that historically hated each other broke down into warring again. For sake of argument, say a significant number from all sides immigrated to America and instead of assimilating to our society, retained theirs, which is what multiculturalism does. Their hate of each other hasn’t been put aside in America and the warring is now moved to our shores. Many innocent Americans and immigrants from other aspects of our society are now caught in the middle and as happened in World War One, drug into the fracas, defending them selves.

Yet another example would be our health laws, which many other nations don’t share. Uncontrolled immigration could allow people into the nation carrying diseases we considered neutralized for our people and epidemics could resurface.

Along those same lines would be that many other peoples don’t share our respect of sanitation, as we have developed and adopted over the years. Without assimilating and maintaining the unsanitary habits from their homeland, again bacteria and disease could flourish in our country, costing many lives. Vaccinating nearly every one could prove unfeasible as, like I already said, we are a nation of finite resources and we can only pay so much in taxes to maintain others before our own economy collapses from being overstressed.

As we are currently seeing, language also comes into play. Recent immigrants, both legal and illegal, are finding they don’t need to learn English as we have government documents printed in multiple languages, costing the already overburdened taxpayer even more. Some don’t see the need to learn our native language, expecting us to cater to theirs, which brings in more friction and restricts immigrants on wages.

Your mention of past wrongs neglects to mention that they were also righted and are being reviewed constantly today, hopefully to benefit the people of the nation.

Our first goal in allowing immigration should be to preserve that national makeup of our country, not to see it ripped apart and returned to what our forefathers fled and fought to escape. There is still a secessionist movement within the nation today that if it continues to grow could propel us towards or into another Civil War like we suffered in the 1860’s.

Uncontrolled immigration will only fuel that movement.

John Moore said...

Back in 1924, Italians, Poles, and even Irish were not considered "white." Not until the government, during WWII, started a public information campaign designed to include those groups as "white" were they considered such. It was in a response to Naziism and fascism in general that the U.S. government decided to persuade its citizens of a more inclusive idea of whiteness.

As far as assimilation goes, even though I love apple pie and baseball, I don't care whether anyone who comes here does. I do care that they adopt American ideas about free speech, free exercize of religion, equal protection of the laws, one person one vote, etc. But in my experience,recent immigrants have not been deficient in their ability and willingness to assimilate those values.

The ethnic riots in France that you talk about are a good example to me of what happens when the idea of nationality is too closely tied to the idea of racial identity. European national identity is different than U.S. national identity in that European identity is closely related to race. When North African Muslim legal immigrants (and their French-born children and grandchildren) were excluded from French society, something was bound to happen. If we do not learn from their mistake, we might have similar problems. The lesson to learn is that we must learn how to assimilate. Ethnic enclaves, racially segregated schools, and separate churches are all barriers to assimilation.

So is language. And this group of Mexican immigrants face a special challenge when it comes to language. Linguists tell us that proximity to home language and darkness of skin are two of the strongest indicators of how long and how successfully a new language is acquired. The closer a person is to their home country (whether Mexico in the Southwestern U.S. or Algeria in France), the longer it takes for second language acquisition. The same is true for skin color. The darker a person's skin is, the longer it takes to learn English. (By the way, these aren't causal relationships, just correlative relationships.)

Given these realities, special programs should be provided to encourage Spanish-only speaking immigrants to learn English. Keep in mind that in all of this, I'm not saying anything about what is right and what is wrong; I'm just saying what is.

But you haven't addressed the question I asked. In your defense, you have addressed some of my beliefs (you must have checked out my blog), but not my question. I'm asking a very different question here, one that I think every reasonable person could agree with. Why do we have different requirements for French to immigrate legally than we do for Germans? Wouldn't it be acceptable if we got rid of the per-nation quota system and instead had one total quota?

LewWaters said...

John, let's get something straight here. You do not control the discussion here, I do.

No, I didn't visit your blog, at least that I know of. I did copy your url and look at what was there, but it is just more open borders nonsense to me.

That being said, let's reduce this to the simplest term, shall we?

Wherever you live, be it a house, apartment, trailer or what, do you leave your doors and windows open 24/7 and allow whoever wishes to just enter as they desire?

If not, why not?

redhawk said...

How about letting the Illuminatis Ileggal immigration Maven practice what they want ... Let them Illegally enter Iran, Mexico, Guatemala, or any other Sovereign country that still has the Cojones to Safeguard their borders.. I am sure that the Iranian Little monkey will give them save heaven in a 2x4 cell.....How Immature and naive can these fruit loops get?????

Susan Duclos said...

I always find it amazing when people try to play the "racist" card when anyone tries to deal with the immigration or illegal immigration issue.

It is simply a way to try to distract from the excellent work you have done with this essay Lew.

Not even worthy of a response, in my mind.

Sorry, but I have no patience for distortions and distraction vs an intelligent conversation which your essay deserves.

Roger W. Gardner said...

Excellent article Lew. Tremendously insightful and well-written. Great work!
As far as this argument is concerned, I don't think you need any help from me. I think you're doing a pretty good job by yourself!

Roger W. Gardner said...

Well now, look what we have here -- Somebody on the looney left actually tried to read one of my articles. unfortunately they didn't read it very well.

After going out of my way to explain very precisely the difference between culture and race, after very carefully distinguishing the difference between being a "racist" and a "culturist" -- the idiot calls me a racist anyway.
Now I ask you -- what are you going to do with an idoit like that?
Don't bother with him, Lew. It's a waste of your valuable time.

John Moore said...

Mike, I came for civil discussion. You're calling people "cowards" has made me decide not to post again. This is my curtain call on this site.


This is your blog and I respect that fact. When I restated my question, I wasn't attempting to control the conversation by bringing us back to my talking points or anything like that. I was only trying to say that I haven't made the argument you are defending against. At least not here. I have on my blog--which is why I brought it up--but I haven't here. I doubt very much that you'd be interested in open borders, which is why I didn't argue for them here. What I argued for was a system that treated all applicants for legal immigration equally, regardless of nation of origin.

Incidentally, open borders is supported by both the left and by the right, but not by the middle. That's why libertarian organizations like The Cato Institute (far right) favor the return to open borders. You cited The Chinese Exclusion Act as being the result of vote pandering; the same is true in the Republican Party right now about immigration. A $40 Billion fence, which the Republican appointed leaders in the Department of Homeland Security have said will not help our security, nor cut down on illegal immigration, certainly isn't in line with the ideas of limited government or any other principle of conservatism. Some politicians have decided that taking certain positions on this issue will lead to political victories. That is why they take their stances. It's not out of conservatism (or liberalism for that matter). Read Burke, of Locke, of Mill, or George Washington or Thomas Jefferson for that matter, any political philosopher you choose and you will find that the current debate between Democrats and Republicans on the issue of immigration is completely unprincipled.

To answer your question, I do not let people come into my house without permission. I also don't set a quota for visitors based on ancestry. I have never told a friend, "Sorry but I'm looking for an Asian today; I've already had too many Europeans this month."

Why don't conservatives get on board to denounce national quotas(virtually the same as racial quotas) in immigration? Because the Democrats are as unprincipled on this issue as the Republicans, they would probably come down in favor of quotas just to take up an opposing position. That would make the Democrats look foolish, and would cost them dearly with both Asians and Latinos.

Of course, I don't care which group brings it up, the Republicans or the Democrats, but it seems like an easy sell to the American people and easy points for whoever takes that side.

If anyone needs me or wants to have a discussion about open borders (not the discussion I've been having here), you can find me at (I will not post name-calling on my blog, so don't bring it.)

LewWaters said...

John, I must have visited your site then and your arguments, even though not directly stating such, do advocate open borders. That would be the next logical step. It appeared you tried to control the conversation by pigeon holing me into your way of thinking, which isn’t going to happen.

I support quotas for a variety of reasons, none of which are to keep America “White.” If you recall, that was the very first point you made in your initial comment.

We are in different times than our Founding Fathers were and I doubt they would still adhere to free and open borders seeing that such is ruining their initial vision.

I find it ironic that you advocate open and unfettered access through our borders yet not your home as well. You may not actually say only one race or ancestry may come in, but I bet your mind would be changed if everyone near you and that knows you deiced to come in all at once. My guess is you would find a way to limit them in that case because your home would be unable to hold every last one of them.

If we removed quota’s as you advocate, how many more Muslims and possible Al Qaeda members would legally migrate here to await orders for the next attack?

You advocate a feel good policy that ends up hurting everyone. As I said, we have a finite amount of resources and they are being stretched now due to illegal immigration. Removing quotas and opening our borders just makes illegals legal and ends up destroying us.


Mike/Raoul, your comments have been deleted because you added nothing to the discussion. Any thing else you post will likewise be deleted. John did not put me on the spot any more than I have him. I did not beg anyone to help out and you know it.

Roger W. Gardner said...

Anyone who knows Lew and knows his background, know that he doesn't need help from anyone, thank you.