Archive for the ‘ABC’s & Cultural Context’ Category


Monday, December 19th, 2016

Note (26DEC2016): A poem —
‘Twas Christmas Day and throughout the land,
Racial propaganda was cinematically at hand.

In “selected theaters”, Hidden Figures had opened as planned
To spread misinformation labelled as grand.

“He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.” -George Orwell (1903-1950)

In these United States of America, who in the present controls telling the history of the past? Who shapes Americans’ view of history? Who? The producers of entertainment — otherwise known collectively as “Hollywood”.

Consider that Americans’ most trusted person in the world is . . . .? You guessed it. An actor! Tom Hanks, whom Americans know not by his own persona but by those of the characters whom he has played via shadows projected onto an otherwise blank screen.

“Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur. The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived.” -Petronius (1st-century A.D.)

The real Tom Hanks? In reality, he may be a great guy. Who knows? What’s worse, who cares? Apparently, not the American public as a whole.

The Real History
“No government ought to be without censors & where the press is free, no one ever will.” -Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)

Since the cinematic studios moved from New York City to Los Angeles early in the 20th-century, “Hollywood” politically and sociologically has tilted towards The Left — economically, too, except as economics applies to “Hollywood”. Early on, some of its productions tested the bounds of common decency, leading to the National Board of Review of Motion Pictures (established originally in 1909) finally to begin real censorship in the early 1930s. Need one comment on the current adherence in “Hollywood” today to common decency?

Then, beginning in the late 1930s “Hollywood” — a number of the most illustrious members of which were card-carrying Communists — evidenced a burst of good old, American traditionalism after Kristallnacht in Nazified Germany. Until that time, “Hollywood” had allowed Nazis’ censors dispatched to these shores by Adolf Hitler in Berlin to alter American cinematic productions. Hey, Germany represented a lucrative market — Nazis or no Nazis.

The Nazis’ censorship notwithstanding, also in the 1930s “Hollywood” began to promote the image of the American Negro. How? Initially, simply by inserting as so-called cameo-roles gratuitous glimpses of well-dressed, upstanding-looking Negroes, for example, standing in public buildings.

“Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together. Thou shalt not wear a mingled stuff, wool and linen together.” -Deuteronomy 22:10

After World War Two, “Hollywood” accelerated its push to turn these United States of America from a predominantly Christian, Euro-Caucasoid nation into a so-called multi-cultural one; including the promotion of racial miscegenation, which had been illegal in many States and today remains contrary to Scripture.

“The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.” (U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 1965. pp. 1-3.)

So went the words of the late-Senator Edward “Teddy” Kennedy about legislation promoting so-called familial reünification — legislation that was to open the floodgates to Africans, Asians, and Latins. Consequence? The dispossessing of the American majority. Meanwhile, Senator Kennedy — himself a philandering, cowardly drunk who later caused Mary Jo Kopechne’s drowning in 1969 — was promising Mr. and Mrs. America that the legislation would not change the complexion of the country. It was a flat-out lie.

He also flat-out lied with the following promise: “Our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually.”

Prior to 1965, the average number of legal immigrants annually was approximately 300,000. Thirty years later, it was more than 1,000,000. Kennedy also lied when he promised that few immigrants would be from Asia.

“Not representative of the typical politician!” you say? Perhaps.

Once passed into law by a Democratic Congress and signed by a Democratic President, the bill did change the complexion of the nation. It drove a stake through the demographic heart of these United States as it had been previously.

“I the Lord search the heart,
I try the reins,
Even to give every man according to his ways,
According to the fruit of his doings.” – Jeremiah 17:10

“All for the better!” you say? Perhaps. Best to judge behavior by its consequences.

In doing so, forget your preconceived biases. Ask yourself the following: Objectively, are these United States better off today than in 1965? Economically? Educationally? Legally? Militarily? Politically? Sociologically?

Acceptance by the then soon-to-be dwindling Euro-Caucasoid majority reflected the incessant barrage of propaganda from the self-styled elitists of The Left in “Hollywood” — later the elitists in academia and the electronic Media. By 2008, the minds of Americans had become numbed to the point that voters elected a Marxist-oriented, Mohammedan-reared Mulatto of uncertain origin — someone who never had served in the military, never had owned a business, and never had held an honest job — whose primary goal seemed to be to have destroyed that which remained of “White America”. Consider his wife and he listening for twenty years to their pastor, Jeremiah Wright (b. 1941), screaming, “God damn America!”

How could such a transformation occur? Hollywood, for one!

It was said, for example, that without the actor Denzel Washington’s (b. 1954) idealized portrayals of Negroes in moving pictures Barack Hussein Obama II never could have moved into the White House.

The Latest
The most recent cinematic revision of history by “Hollywood” comes in the form of Hidden Figures. To begin, ask yourself the following: Whence came the name “computer”?

According to reports about Hidden Figures, its derivation lies in those electronic machines being named after a group of Negresses led by one Dorothy Vaughn at NASA. These women supposedly computed the trajectory for the rocket that carried the Astronaut, John Glenn (1921-2016), into orbit around Earth. Among them was the light-skinned Negress, Kathryn Johnson, who worked on the project as an electrical engineer. “Hollywood” and its sycophants now are characterizing these women as “the brains” behind NASA.

So, were these women actually the first human computers? No.

The truth is that U.S. Army contracted for the development of the first, functional electronic computer years previously during World War Two. The two, male, Euro-Caucasoid developers — John W. Mauchly and John “Pres” Eckert, Jr. at the University of Pennsylvania — named the machine after a group of Euro-Caucasoid women each laboring to compute the trajectories of individual pieces of artillery. These women were the first human “computers”. As a prelude to the future, the first electronic computer, Eniac with its 18,000 vacuum-tubes, was intended to replace them.

[Note: John von Neumann (1903-1957; aka/Johann von Neumann). Hungarian-Jewish mathematician, having made truly important contributions to both mathematics and physics as well as game-theory, sometimes incorrectly is credited with the development of the first electronic computer. See McCartney, S: Eniac. New York: Walker & Co. (1999).]

So, were the Negresses actually “the brains” behind NASA? Did they even provide the computations used by NASA? No.

Electronic computers actually provided the trajectories. Subsequently, these women checked the computations for possible errors.

Does Hidden Figures represent just another in a long line of historically-oriented productions that exceed by a wide margin poetic license and that fall into the category of misleading propaganda? Historical hogwash by “Hollywood”. Apparently.

Do Negroes require such phony propaganda in order to present a creative, productive image? Apparently, “Hollywood” believes that they do.

In this age of a declining American nation on fire, to present phony images of Negroes who, nevertheless, did make notable contributions is to demean those contributions and those who made them. Doing so only fuels the fire of divisiveness and resentment.

See “Truth & Consequences” herein.

In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.


Monday, June 13th, 2016

The great, anonymous, military strategist who coöpted Sun Tsu’s name emphasized the importance of knowing the enemy. To Mohammedans, we infidels are the enemy. They know us, and none among us is worse than a homosexual.

Do we know them? Do we even want to know them?

See “Americans?” under … .

“Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with woman kind; it is an abomination.” -Leviticus 18:22

“And if a man lie with mankind as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination; they surely shall be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” -Leviticus 20:13

The Hebraic Bible is explicit and unambiguous. Homosexuality is an abomination before God, demanding of capital punishment.

The Hebraic Bible is the foundation firstly of Judaism then Christianity then Mohammedanism (aka/Islam). In this age of secular relativism gripping the West, such notions seem archaic and barbaric — not to orthodox Mohammedans (aka/Muslims), however. Make no mistake. Orthodox Mohammedans are no more “radical” than orthodox Jews or devout Catholics; they are orthodox.

As such, they respect The Book and that which it says. They act accordingly. Their recent, homosexual victims died in testimony to that respect.

To Mohammedans, homosexuals have made a mockery of sacred beliefs. They view so-called homosexual marriage as, perhaps, the ultimate affront to the Almighty. To them, these United States of America have degenerated into an immoral cesspool of depraved degradation, and this nation has transformed itself into the “Great Satan”. We infidels’ calling Mohammedans names does not diminish the force nor negate the substance of their argument.

“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.” -Samuel Adams (1722-1803)

In fact, many Americans view homosexuality with disdain if not disgust, the media notwithstanding. They view a tiny, homosexual minority as having turned the morality of these United Stated inside-out and upside-down; thereby, imperiling its very existence as a republic. They believe that the Founding Fathers would agree with them.

Science tells us, “Behavior has its consequences.”

Homosexuality is a behavior. It has its consequences.

One billion Mohammedans consider it an abomination before God. They are not alone. Many in the East view homosexuality as unacceptable if not intolerable. Many in the West agree but mostly keep silent. Although most Americans rightly would not condone homicide, some may be quietly sympathetic to it, affrighted by the wrath of organized homosexuality and its supporters to admit their sympathy.

Omar Mateen, the alleged avenger in Orlando, was willing to die for his beliefs. In doing so, he quickly has been characterized as “mentally unstable”. Was he?

Meanwhile, we Americans hardly are willing to fight for ours. By the way, what are our beliefs?

In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.


Monday, March 28th, 2016

NOTE (17APR2016): Some claim, as some always have claimed, that we are nearing the end of days. Could it be true? Nuclear war? Plague?
     Let us not forget that behavior is a function of context and consequences. Consider the following citation from the Scriptures, worth reading even for atheists:
“Woe unto the wicked! It shall be ill with him;
For the work of his hands shall be done to him.” -Isaiah 3:11

“An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.” -Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975)

Mightn’t it be amusing — for the enemies of the West, that is? Amusing to witness Euro-Caucasians in Europe and North America willingly — nay, gleefully — surrender their territory, their resources, their wealth, their culture, and even their very biology to other socio-biological groups.

A Mortal Wound
Too young to remember 1965? Well, it was the year that the Democrats led by President Lyndon B. Johnson and Senator “Teddy” Kennedy drove the stake of diversity through the heart of that which had been a Christian nation for Euro-Caucasians using the gambit of “family reünification”. The legislation for “family-reunification” proved to be one of the most important pieces of legislation of the 20th-century, directly leading to the “multi-culturalism” of the early 21st.

Initially, Johnson, who could lie with abandon — think Tonkin Gulf, wanted to link increased immigration to vocational skills. A congressman from Ohio, Robert Sweeney, balked; affrighted that it would allow too many, non-European immigrants. He persuaded Johnson to link increased immigration to reüniting families, believing wrongly that doing so would reduce the number of such immigrants; given the relatively small, non-European percentage of the American population at the time.

With the deal done, both Johnson and Kennedy promised that the legislation would not change the complexion of the country. They lied!

Not only was the late-Senator an adulterer, a drunkard, and a murderer but a liar. Excellent qualifications for modern, American politicians. Think Bill and Hillary.

In this case, Kennedy lied when he claimed, “Our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually.”

In this case, Johnson lied when he claimed, “This bill we sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not restructure the shape of our daily lives.”

Prior to 1965, the average number of legal immigrants annually was approximately 300,000.  Thirty years later, it was more than one million.  Kennedy also claimed falsely that few would be from Asia. Today, the fastest growing demographic groups are from Asia.

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” -George Orwell (1903-1950)

Even to remind anyone of this sordid piece of history is to elicit rage among those who deny truth in the name of ideology; especially younger Americans, the so-called Millenials. An argument, nevertheless, can be made that Johnson, Kennedy, and many of their supporters understood that the opposite of that which they promised would be the case; that they understood that most of the immigrants would be poor and uneducated; and that, once citizens, these immigrants were likely to vote Democratic as such groups tend to do.

In essence, an argument can be made that, in the long term, the Democrats were jeopardizing the entire Euro-Caucasoid heritage of these United States of America in exchange for votes to win a few elections in the short term. Unfashionable as it may be in this age of quasi-Marxist egalitarianism, some Americans, especially older ones, believe that the overwhelming, electoral victory of the Democrats in 1965 led the incipient demise of their nation within two generations. The overwhelming election of Barack Hussein Obama II in 2008 didn’t help much either.

So, let’s briefly mention the consequences of economic, political, and sociological laws and regulations since 1965. A dispossessed majority. Divisiveness linked to diversity. Deepening debt. Expanding government. Lawyerism. Serial military defeats. Abominable social degradation never witnessed previously in history. A nation in decline. A nation on fire. Mightn’t it be amusing for the enemies of the West to witness these events?


The Willingly Dispossessed Majority

The Mulatto of Mohammedan heritage currently occupying the White House to the cheers of those whom he joyfully would destroy — recall his twenty years under the tutelage of the Negroid, pastoral demagogue, Jeremiah Wright shouting “God damn America!” — nominates one Merrick Garland (b. 1952) to replace Antonin Scalia (1936-1016) as a justice on the United States Supreme Court, the most powerful court the world ever has witnessed — a power opposed by the anti-Federalists in1787. Who is this lawyer, Garland? What does he represent?

Garland is not a Euro-Caucasian. He is a Semitic-Caucasian. He is not Christian. He is Jewish.

“The Hebrews have done more to civilize men than any other nation. If I were an atheist, and believed blind eternal fate, I should still believe that fate had ordained the Jews to be the most essential instrument for civilizing the nations.” -President John Adams (1725-1836)

Nothing wrong with being Jewish, but the pros and cons of being Jewish aren’t the point. The point is of the current, eight justices on the Court, three already are Jews of The Left with one of the three a known lesbian. Garland would make four Jews out of nine justices. There sits not a single Protestant, male, Euro-Caucasian, the group that founded this nation.

As a religious group, Jews represent less than 2% of the American population. Protestants represent 50% of the population.

Politically, Garland is not as much of The Left as the current, three, Jewish justices, nor is he classically conservative. In fact, he is neo-liberal “progressive” with a long history of rendering decisions siding with Big Labor against Small Business. Clearly, he is no Antonin Scalia. His confirmation to the Court would symbolize the further success of the disestablishmentarians within these United States — success that accelerated with Earl Warren’s Court in the 1950s and 1960s.

See “The Disestablishmentarians”.

Biology and Behavior
It’s the fashion these days to preach falsely that there are no differences among the races and sub-races. Really? No difference between the average Scandinavian and the average African pygmy? Mightn’t one beg to differ?

“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” -George Orwell

Once again, let us note that telling the truth has become a dangerous act. Let us, nevertheless, also note that Science has documented that 70% of the variance in human behavior is determined biologically.

What determines basic biology? Genetics. Different races and sub-races are the consequence of different genomes among them.

No, that fact does not fit the current, oppressive fashion of quasi-Marxist, egalitarian ideology, but it is reality. Let’s not forget that Mother Nature cares not one whit about ideology — only about reality.

Ignorant and Indoctrinated
“Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur. The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived.” -Petronius (1st-century A.D.)

Pity those so-called Millenials. As a group, ignorant and indoctrinated; yet, representing the American future. They are the sorrowful product of the blathering of quasi-Marxist academics, the policies of egalitarian bureaucrats, and the propagandizing of moguls in Big Media. They know little of civics or history, let alone mathematics and science.

“Every nation has the government for which it is fit.” -Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821)

The Millenials actually view the old Judeo-Bolshevik, “Bernie” Sanders as offering something new, wonderful, and spiritually liberating instead of that which he really offers — something as old as Karl Marx, as awful as contemporary Venezuela, and as homicidally tyrannical as Mao and Stalin. They live in a world of virtual, digital reality divorced from actual, analog reality. No, their uninformed and misguided behavior may not be their fault, but it is their responsibility. It has its consequences.


An Alternative

Is there not an alternative? If so, what be it?

The four, secular cornerstones of society are government, law, education, and medical delivery. The alternative to the current trend is a society in which these four cornerstones reflect a revised constitution, traditional American ideals and values, and the guidelines of the Scientific Method — namely, specificity, objectivity, and accountability.

Specificity n.: defining events in a way that differentiates those events from other events that may be similar but not identical.
Objectivity n.: referring to events that are observable and measurable, either directly or indirectly; and
Accountability n.: observing and measuring events in a way that is verifiable and can be made public.

Heretofore, these three, simple guidelines have been an anathema to most politicians, bureaucrats, and lawyers. It need not be so.

Context and Consequences

Science says, “Behavior occurs in a context and has its consequences. Context and consequences!”

Given the current context, the behavioral trends therein, and the consequences therefrom, we can hope for the best whilst expecting the worst. Whatever the case may be, some will win, and some will lose. Upon whom would you bet to win?

The Christian Euro-Caucasians who’ve demonstrated a relish for their own disenfranchisement and demise? (See “White Supremacy”. )

The Negroes who’ve honed demanding, protesting, and rioting instead of merit to a fine edge? (See “Truth & Consequences”. )

The Mohammedans wedded to a theological doctrine almost a thousand years behind the times and engaged in that which they call a “Silent Invasion” of these United States and a not-so-silent invasion of Europe? (See “Americans?”. )

The Mexicans whose own country represents an exercise in making the least of the most and who are engaged in that which they call “La Reconquista”? (See “Diversity”. )

The Jews? Recall the following, old joke: Put two Jews into a room alone. What do you get? Three opinions.

The Jews of The Left have prospered and expressed their gratitude by undermining the foundation of this nation that allowed them entry by their promoting that which they call “social justice” — think George Soros?

The Jews of The Right who also have prospered but fragmented into “neo-cons” who never met a war that they didn’t like and classical liberals who have shown themselves to be almost impotent in their battle against their landsmen of The Left and the “neo-cons? (See “The Jewish Question”. )

Ultimate Victors

So, in the end, be the end other than total destruction by nuclear war or plague, who will win? Who will rule?

The Asians, primarily the Orientals? Possibly. Don’t scoff.

Don’t the Orientals now represent the fastest growing demographic population in this nation divided by diversity? Aren’t they more intelligent than every other group except the Jews? Aren’t they more industrious? Aren’t they better educated in subjects that matter versus, say, “Black Studies” or “Women’s Studies”? Aren’t they family-oriented in a patriarchal structure amidst a nation where whoring and bastardy have become virtues to be praised in the media and supported by an enslaving government?

There are substantial, biological differences among the races, egalitarian propaganda notwithstanding. Ask any physician about race-related diseases, such as sickle cell anemia.

So, how will this profound economic, political, and sociological saga end? However it ends, context, biological as well as environmental, and consequences following actions will tell the tale. Ideology, will not.

In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.


Monday, September 14th, 2015

Note (28SEP2015): Points to ponder:
1) Between 2009 and 2015, the median income of American households has fallen by $1,748. The real unemployment rate remains at 10.5%. –Washington Times, 14SEP2015, p. 30.
2) In terms of commercial competitiveness, these United States of America rank 32nd out of 34 developed countries. –Wall Street Journal, 28SEP2015, p.A16.
3) By 2055, Euro-Caucasians will comprise only 46% of the American population and 31% by 2065, having fallen from 62% today. –Wall Street Journal, 28SEP2015, p.A2.

“God watches out for little children, fools, drunks and the United States of America.” -Otto von Bismark (1815-1898)

Is He still? Our nation has become a nation on fire, consuming itself in the divisiveness of diversity. The Chinese have characterized us as a “nation in terminal decline”. Terminal decline? Terminal, indeed! Alas, could the Chinese be correct?

With regard to nations in decline, Europe, especially Western Europe, is leading the way. No surprise. Forty-five years ago, Jean Raspail predicted it in his dramatic narrative entitled The Camp of the Saints.

Some years ago, the King of Morocco boasted that the Mohammedans would reconquer Europe through the womb. Today, his boast is coming true, paradoxically applauded by the self-loathing victims of the unarmed invasion from Africa and the Middle East.

So, what of these United States of America? Did someone, years ago, predict the current fate that a now apathetic, passive, indifferent, American people — poisoned by that which might be called Radical Maternalism — would bring upon itself? Yes. His name? Adolf Hitler.

In 1937, Hitler held a secret meeting attended by selected leaders of his Nazi Party and officers of his general staff. He presented his vision for the world. No, Germany would not rule the world; only continental Europe while occupying Russia or, at least the eastern part thereof. The British Empire would remain intact to maintain international stability. Japan would control the Orient. These United States would control the Western Hemisphere — temporarily.

Why temporarily? Because the heterogeneity of our population, even then, would undermine this great nation — sapping its strength, wounding its will, and paralyzing its power. Who would save us from ourselves?

In the Koran, Mohammed himself, relating the words of the Archangel Gabriel, described the futility of attempting to save another’s soul from himself. Mohammed was correct. No one else can save us Americans from ourselves.

Was Bismark also correct? Might God save us from ourselves once again. If so, how?

During the Long Peace (aka/the “Cold War”), this nation kept the erstwhile Soviets at bay not because we were so competent — think Korea then Vietnam — but because they were so incompetent. The Soviet Union destroyed itself when President Reagan drove a stake through its evil heart. Why would God save such a brutal, atheistic tyranny, anyway?

Today, Barack Hussein Obama II is provoking Russia as best he can, believing that Vladimir Putin is in no position to wage war against us. Untrue! The issue is not the Russian position but the Russian will.

Putin might taunt us, but would he risk destroying Mother Russia in a worldwide nuclear conflagration? A predecessor, Brezhnev, would not even when facing a weak and incompetent Carter — nor will Putin, now facing Obama. Why should he? Obama, hell-bent on destroying “White America”, will be doing it for him. In the long term, a “Black America” or a “Colored America” will be no match for an increasingly reïnvigorated Russia; especially a Russia in an alliance with China, no matter how uneasy.

More immediately, though, who remains to bring down these United States of America? The Chinese alone?

Admittedly, the Chinese are a proud people and rightly so. Ironically, the self-loathing ideologues of The Left here in these United States derogatorily would call them “racists”, assuming that everyone else in the world believes racism to be bad. They are “racists”. In the last few decades, boasting their relative homogeneity, the Chinese have advanced faster and further than any other people ever.

If the Chinese fail in their quest for a place in the Sun, their failure will be the consequence of pride. Their moving too fast and too far militarily will awaken the remnant of that which Japanese Admiral Yamamoto characterized in 1941 as a “sleeping tiger” and will make us very angry — so angry that nationalism will trump diversity. Consequence? A temporary cohesion among minorities otherwise at war against each other and against a progressively dispossessed, American majority.

Do not believe that China is imploding economically or politically. That which we are witnessing are merely growing pains in the first long-lasting, fascistic state albeit one still labelling itself Communistic. The greatest threat to a people typically comes from within. So it will be with China.

Meanwhile, if the Russians and they merely leave us Americans to ourselves — with our descent into deepening debt, penchant for serial military defeats, and passion for depraved self-degradation and vulgarity, we will destroy ourselves. If, however, Bismark’s remark holds, and God does save us from ourselves, He will do so via the miscalculations of our adversaries.

Who else remains to bring down these United States? Iran?

“Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme.” -The Recital (The Koran), The Spoils 8:36

Clearly, Iranian foreign policy is anti-Israeli. It is anti-American. It is anti-Christian, consistent with the Koran. It is homicidal. Ah, but to what extent is it suicidal? No one knows.

“Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur. The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived.” -Petronius (1st-century A.D.)

In electing Obama, those voting for him wanted to be deceived although he implicitly and, to some extent, explicitly advised the electorate of his intentions to destroy “White America”. Since his reëlection especially, he has been doing so with abandon — the Constitution be damned!

“Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” -Galatians VI:7

With the recent unconstitutional treaty with Iran, he has surpassed himself, exposing the entire world to nuclear destruction from which no aerobic life will survive. Accordingly, the question arises, Is Obama the final nail in the American coffin? If so, he represents God’s having abandoned us, leaving us to the inescapable consequences of our own foolish, ill-conceived, and misguided behavior.

In 1965, legislation for “family-reunification” was sponsored in 1965 by Senator Edward “Teddy” Kennedy (1932-2009), younger brother of the late President. It proved to be one of the most important and devastating pieces of legislation of the 20th century, directly leading to the “multi-culturalism” of the 21st.

Kennedy promised that the legislation would not change the complexion of the country.  He lied.

“Our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually.”

Prior to 1965, the average number of legal immigrants annually was approximately 300,000. Thirty years later, it became more than one million. He also claimed wrongly that few would be from Asia.

An argument can be made that the Senator and many of his supporters understood that the opposite of what he promised would be the case; that they understood that most of the immigrants would be poor and uneducated; and that, once citizens, these immigrants were likely to vote Democratic, as such groups tend to do. In essence, an argument can be made that, in the long term, Kennedy and his allies were jeopardizing the entire Anglo-European heritage of these United States of America in exchange for votes to win elections in the short term.

In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.