, , , , , , , , , ,


Let’s talk about an American populist phenomenon.

Sick of immigration and sick of both ruling parties that they saw (correctly) as being pro-immigration, a powerful movement of white Americans emerged with immigration as their number one concern. They argued that the fundamental American character was being changed by the flood of these outsiders, most of whom could not even speak proper English. These populists claimed to be just representing the positive interests of native-born white Americans; however, the vast majority of their rhetoric was negative, directed outward at the immigrants and the immigrants’ patrons in Washington. They felt alternately ignored and/or persecuted by the establishment, and for good reason — their often racist rhetoric did not endear them with the powers-that-be of either party.

Their famous spokesman and presidential candidate, once they finally found him, never formally endorsed these people’s xenophobia, but his platform was virtually indistinguishable from theirs. And his campaign really did provide an outlet for people who justly felt ignored on the immigration issue. Their doom, though, was their limited appeal — they and their candidate could never break out of the mid-20s in polling, as immigration simply wasn’t that much of a hot-button issue for the majority of the populace, and the movement fell apart after the candidate’s eventual defeat at the polls.

I am speaking, of course, about the Know Nothings of the mid-19th century. Alarmed by Catholic immigrants from Ireland and Germany, they pretended to be just pro-protestant-white; but as we are seeing today, such a movement inevitably descends into out-and-out racism and negativity. Unable to capture over a quarter of the American vote, the Know Nothing movement eventually failed and died.

Just like this know-nothing.

Just like this know-nothing.

It’s unclear how, or whether, white people can have a lobby specifically for their interests without the eventual handing out of the white hoods and robes. As Ben Domenech points out, “The white American with the high-school education who works at the duck-feed factory in northern Indiana has as much right to advance his interest as anyone else.” It’s true that rural white poverty is virtually ignored by the media, while urban black poverty and #BlackLivesMatter are regular features.

However, Domenech continues, “But that interest is now being redefined in very narrow terms, in opposition to the interests of other ethnic groups[.]” Furthermore, I would add, such a development is nigh-inevitable for any white movement, as history has repeatedly shown.

It’s a shame because everyone DOES deserve agency, and people of a given country DO have a valid right to control its ethnic makeup. Hardly anyone challenges even Japan’s draconian racial-purity policies, after all; nobody questioned the wisdom of splitting Chechoslovakia into two more ethnically homogenous states. Yet, as we have seen, it is impossible for any citizen of any Western state to assert the same interests, lest they be labeled racist fascists. And the end result is, the only people left representing opposition to immigration are, well, fascists.

As always, this distinction is far more dramatic in Europe, whose far-right has always made their American counterparts look like a bunch of limp-wristed cosmopolitan wussies. If a Trump supporter, or a Know Nothing, is your drunk uncle making racist jokes about Obama at Thanksgiving dinner, then a Sweden Democrat or Jobbik founder is the skinhead with a Celtic cross tattooed on his back and a swastika on his front, skipping Thanksgiving dinner because he’s out burning a cross.

But with a lack of any other options, people fed up with Sweden’s insane and suicidal immigration and refugee policy have no choice but to vote for the Sweden Democrats, despite their neo-Nazi origins. This has propelled the group to be the third-largest party in Sweden; a recent poll has them even ranking first, by hitting that magic number of 25%. (Sound familiar?)

But this influx of regular Swedish voters has forced the unfortunately-abbreviated SD into cleaning up its image. They are now a populist conservative party, not unlike UKIP, with mostly mainstream conservative policies outside their one great issue. Nevertheless, due to the immigration stance that is viewed as completely unacceptable by the Swedish establishment, they remain frozen out of any power or influence despite being the third-largest party. Instead, the mainstream left, center and right parties have all thrown in together under the greatest of urgency in order to maintain their top priority: maintaining Sweden’s EU-highest-per-capita acceptance of immigrants from Islamic nations. This in turn has led to SD’s surging at the polls, which predictably led to their enemies calling them racists and Nazis.

Because pro-immigration forces in Europe don’t really have any other argument besides calling their enemies racists. It is an exceptionally powerful argument and it does indeed shut down any debate, but there is no logic behind their position. From a strictly rational point of view, how on earth does it benefit Sweden or Germany to import hundreds of thousands of relatively uneducated, Islamic minorities into their previously homogenous societies? These groups will be tough if not impossible to assimilate, as existing Muslim communities there have proven; large percentages of this population reject the rule of law and the Enlightenment and laugh at European secularism. They will never fit in; screaming that normal Swedes are racists into you are hoarse does not change this simple fact that these populations do not want to assimilate. All they want is the peace and prosperity of secular Swedish culture without having to actually accept secular Swedish culture.

As the refugee crisis shows no evidence of doing anything besides endlessly accelerating, as Muslims desperately seek to escape their hellholes like Syria. Other parties with fascist origins similar to SD are on the rise, in France, Austria, Slovakia, Norway, Finland, and elsewhere. Thus, future Europeans will increasingly face the unpleasant choice of either seeing their nations turned into fascist states, or else Islamofascist states. Back to Domenech: “When neither major centrist party will prioritize or even acknowledge the problems faced by a people confronted by massive and troublesome issues of immigration and ethnic tension, eventually they feel they have no choice but to protest vote for [French fascist] Le Pen.”

Their crisis shows just how silly the immigration debate is here.

Trump’s movement is basically our answer to the Sweden Democrats and France’s National Front. The Donald himself may not be a white supremacist, but a lot of his supporters sure-as-shit are. He has the same difficulty in trying to present himself as a mainstream candidate; he gets the same scorn from the Establishment, who want nothing more than to shut up. But the immigration question is simply not the same in America. It isn’t even close.

I speak from personal experience as well as stats: despite Trump’s rants, Hispanic populations do not show any increased proclivity to violence once you control for poverty. Second-generation Hispanic-Americans don’t appear to have any more issues with assimilation than second-generation Italian-Americans.

I believe the crucial differences are: 1) There is no religious conflict, as Hispanics are generally devout Catholics. And there is very little conflict between Protestants and Catholics these days. Hell, evangelical protestants simply can’t get enough of Catholics like Rick Santorum and Sam Brownback, can they? 2) Most Hispanic immigrants respect Western culture, work legendarily hard, and just want to fit in. And, of course, 3) America has vast experience in assimilating other cultures and ethnicities. It hasn’t exactly always gone well, of course. But, if nothing else, this current immigration wave is all old hat for the United States, unlike Sweden which has never experienced anything like their current crisis.

Of course, this does not change the fact that there are nefarious powers in play here. Conservative plutocrats, and their sock puppets at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and at Cato, want increased immigration in order to lower wages for the working class. Holier-than-thou liberals see increasing immigration as a moral duty, and more importantly, as another issue we can call people “racist” over. (We really, really love calling people racists, to be honest.) And nobody could care less about the working class black people and white people immigration impacts. So yes, there are SOME issues here, and yes, some reasonable restrictions of immigration ARE necessary for strictly economic reasons. And finally, poor rural whites really are ignored equally by both parties.

But talking about Hispanics “taking over our country” is illogical and false. America is sitting pretty on this issue. If you want to feel REAL fear at the pit of your stomach, look over to Europe and especially Sweden. Their story does not end well.