MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Of Course Most Immigrants Come from Shithole Countries. So What?

The whole point of America is that it doesn't matter where you come from. It matters what you do when you're here.

Big Daddy is in trouble again, this time for allegedly calling Haiti and most African nations "shithole countries." President Donald Trump denies the specific phrase, but let's give him a pass on this one, because he's right in the largest sense possible: Most immigrants who come to America do indeed come from places they'd rather not live or work. By definition. Whether their homelands are technically shitholes or something less offensive to contemporary ears isn't really a question. People come here because they think it's going to be better than where they're from.

It was true of all of my grandparents and all of your ancestors, too, if you're American. We all have roots elsewhere.

The promise of America, since before its founding as a country, is precisely that you can start over here. Even within the country, the ability to strike out for the territory and begin again motivated many of our most mythic figures, from Natty Bumppo to Sam Houston to Huck Finn to Pa Ingalls in the Little House books. I apologize for dragging my family history into every goddamn post I write these days, but their experience speaks directly to the current nativist moment. When my grandparents left Ireland and Italy in the early 20th century, they were leaving shithole countries if such things have ever existed. They weren't starving because they worked on farms and in fishing towns, but they had no future and not much of a present in those places. Like millions of others, they left farms in the old country and packed themselves like sardines into cities in the new. That was 100 years ago and, as every yahoo on Twitter has seen fit to tell me in the past 24 hours, Things were different back then! No welfare state! Those countries were part of the "West," which is best!

Well, there was a welfare state, at least as it pertains to what today's immigrants (legal and illegal) qualify for, which is basically school for your kids and emergency medical care. Since the mid-1990s, when Bill Clinton was re-elected partly on the strength of his promises to end illegal immigration, illegals don't qualify for transfer payments (to the extent that immigrants, legal or otherwise, manage to cadge food stamps and the like, it's a rounding error in federal and state budgets). My mother, the daughter of Italians, didn't speak English until she went to public school (for free!) in Waterbury, Connecticut. My father, the son of Irish immigrants, went to St. Augustine's in Brooklyn for free because the Catholic order running the place during the Depression had a glancing familiarity with the New Testament and Christ's injunctions to help the poor and downtrodden. More important, the whole argument about the welfare state being overloaded is a regular laff riot, isn't it? The mostly conservative types who are anti-immigrant are always (and often rightly) bitching and moaning about welfare suddenly become its biggest defenders when a goddamn Haitian or Salvadoran shows up here to work long hours pulling Slurpees at the local 7-11. And that Milton Friedman chestnut about how you can't simultaneously "have free immigration and a welfare state"? He was, uncharacteristically, wrong, as a matter of fact and on principle. Lots of countries have both.

Courtesy Simon & SchusterCourtesy Simon & SchusterThen there's the argument that runs along the "but your grandparents and parents came from Europe and a tradition of limited government and soap and Winston Churchill and didn't vote Democrat..." Let's be clear: America has always been highly ambivalent about immigration, at least since Ben Franklin fretted that German-speaking Catholics could never really fit in to the culture of colonial Pennsylvania. I imagine that native Americans, including and maybe especially Squanto, who met the Mayflower and greeted them in English(!), felt this disquiet even earlier. In my family's case, being Catholic in pre-World War II America was not a point in their favor, because being Catholic meant that you worshiped the Whore of Babylon, ate fish on Friday, and practiced ritual cannibalism while having a lot of brats (all true). Catholics are the single-largest religious affiliation in the U.S. now but back then they were scary enough to "real" Americans in the 1910s and '20s that the Ku Klux Klan reformed in large part to fight against their willingness to booze it up and ball like rabbits in increasingly mongrelized cities (read The Great Gatsby again!). Prohibition, supported by the Klan and other WASP elites, was as much about keeping the Catholics—the wops and the micks especially—down. Italy sent only anarchists and wasn't even a real country until it became a dangerous imperial power under Mussolini, right, and for god's sake, Ireland was run by a bunch of potato-snorting apes prone to violence and singing and bomb-throwing.

Oh, and one more thing: The wretched refuse washing up on the East Coast had it easy compared to the Asians flooding the West Coast. The very first broad-based (which is to say racist) immigration restrictions were leveled against Chinese migrants in 1882. Back then, euphemisms were less common so a complete ban on Chinese people coming here to work was simply called The Chinese Exclusion Act. Anti-Chinese animus was virulent enough that it underwrote the single-biggest mass lynching in American history, which took place in Los Angeles in 1871. It was followed by less overt but no less sweeping legislation to keep Japanese out. Long before they became "model minorities," Asians were barred from coming here. They persisted, though, and America is a better place for their willingness to route around racism and attempts to keep them out.

So it's the worst sort of anachronism to pretend that past immigrants were welcomed here because they've become model Americans since their ancestors first showed their undersized and sloping brows, over-sized noses and lips, and dark and slanted eyes.

And it bears restating, over and over again: The point of America is not where you're from, it's what you do when you show up here. And we know exactly what immigrants, whether legal or not, do when they get here. They pay taxes, including Social Security taxes that they have no chance of ever seeing again. They commit crimes at far lower rates than native-born counterparts. They "are responsible for significant economic growth." They start businesses at higher rates and use welfare at lower rates than their made-in-the-U.S.A. analogues. They fight our nation's wars.

Trump is right to stress that people originally granted "temporary protected status" cannot and should not expect to have that status constantly extended. He's right, too, that Congress should fix the issue of "dreamers"—of kids brought here illegally as minors or born to illegals—once and for all via legislation. But he and all the nativists are wrong in thinking that America, this great, bruising, hulk of a nation, would be better off with fewer immigrants from fewer shitholes (the Republican Party is calling for a 50 percent reduction in legal immigration). It's the people fleeing shitholes who have helped to make this country great. And isn't that what Trump promised us back in 2016?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • GILMORE™||

    allegedly calling Haiti and most African nations "shithole countries."

    I'm disappointed. the impression i got from facebook/twitter was that he said this in a public speech.

    is this really just some democrat aide who squealed to the media, "OMG Trump used crude word!". Is that really all this is about? ffs.

    i keep thinking people will eventually decide that there's "real news" out there in the world, and that getting outraged over "somebody said someone else said" is a stupid waste of time and resources. I'm starting to think: no, that's all they do anymore.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    Oh my god. I can't believe you just said that.

  • Number 2||

    Because we're certain that no other high-ranking government official in the entire history of the U.S. Government has ever privately referred to other countries as "shitholes."

  • Ecoli||

    Didn't some big-shot ambassador make a wise crack when the ambassador from Uganda (another shithole) entered a cocktail party, something like "careful boys, the cannibals have arrived"?

    I vaguely remember that from times gone by.

  • Jimbo||

    I remember. They were really Fine Young Cannibals, in fact.

  • mad_kalak||

    ...and she drives me crazy..ooh..oohh, and I just can't help myself.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    And, let's face it, many of the countries in question ARE shitholes. Haiti sure is. Based on some cursory reading, it always has been. Misgoverned by the French, misgoverned by ex-slaves, and so on, and on.

  • ElDuderino||

    And their shit always smelled like fudge!

  • JuanQPublic||

    is this really just some democrat aide who squealed to the media, "OMG Trump used crude word!". Is that really all this is about? ffs

    Pretty much, yes, that's all it's about. The Washington Post, per usual, overshadowed far more important news with this Trump reflexiveness, such as the House vote to extend warrantless eavesdropping.

  • Bacon-Magic glib reasonoid||

    Oh fuck I thought the way they were talking about this he said it in public. They just can't help their selves. When the Jacket thinks it's awash the proggies should know they don't have a winner.

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    You are worse then Hitler.

  • Bacon-Magic glib reasonoid||

    Nikki?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You know who was worse than Hitler 50 years ago?

  • Jimbo_Shithole||

    Well as someone who feels this type of discrimination, and, dare I say, MEANNESS(!!), every day...well, I don't really remember what I was going to say.

  • Holmes IV||

    Right, it is stupid. And it was stupid when people blew up about Obama saying that the ACA was "A Big F'in Deal."

    I am starting to think that referring to government as "The Swamp" is far to insulting to legitimate swamps everywhere. If I were a swamp monster I'd be offended by this term.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Actually it was Biden who made the "big f'in deal" comment, but yeah.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    One of the worst things about social media is that it seems to make everyone who uses it regress back to a middle school level of maturity:

    "OMG, did you hear what Whoseits said about Wha'stheirface?! I, like, LITERALLY CAN'T EVEN RIGHT NOW!!!1!!1!1!!!!"

  • callahan2211||

    Agree with you. So he used a crude word, big deal.

    If I'm building a company or a team, I want to fill it with the best of the best of the best. I'm sure every sh!thole country has good surgeons, engineers, scientists, etc. I think what he was saying is why do we have to accept so many from countries with high perceived corruption. He did say "like Norway", but he could have said, "like Japan" or "like Portugal" or "Hong Kong" or "Chile"(least corrupt in latin America). I think you could make a good case that those countries with a high perceived corruption index, would in Trump opinion be sh!tholes.

  • BambiB||

    Not just that. Retarded. The average intelligence level in Africa is mentally retarded
    https://static.iq-research.info/ 20150809/img/iq_by_country.png

    That means competent surgeons, engineers, scientists, etc. are rare . A person of average intelligence (IQ 100) in their society would be the equivalent of a very gifted person in ours.

    So do we recruit their best (leaving Africa dumber than ever)? Or are we just importing morons who can vote for Demoncraps and socialism?

    It's not just corruption. It's murdering farmers who have the "wrong" skin color, raping infants to "cure" AIDS, participation in the "bushmeat" trade (which is where AIDS came from) and a level of intelligence so low they can never assimilate into our society... except maybe in Kalifornia.

  • JFree||

    hahaha. so a white supremacist group funds 'scientific IQ tests' in Africa - and you're the moron who actually posts it here

  • Brett Bellmore||

    hahaha, you look at Africa, and think, "Yes, that looks like a society run by smart people!"

  • ImanAzol||

    I'm disapppointed, because anyone who's been around people from a third world shithole knows that a certain percentage of them continue to live like they're in a shithole--squatting over the toilet and shitting on the seat, not washing hands, shitting in alleys, smearing shit on walls, using shit as fertilizer on food, and generally being the worst kind of shit you expect from a third world shithole.

    And we don't need them turning our country into more of a shithole than the Democrats have made it.

  • BambiB||

    I hope he did say it. It's the truth.

    A fundamental difference between immigrants of yesteryear and those from shithole countries today is that the former had something to offer. At a certain point in our history, we even selected who could come and who could not. But today, Trump's in trouble for characterizing as shitholes countries where AIDS-infected men rape infants, where farmers are dispossessed of their land (or killed) based on the color of their skin, where people are starving - while just down the road tons of food sit in warehouses.

    Worst of all the average IQ for most of Africa is 65 or less. (

  • BambiB||

    I hope he did say it. It's the truth.

    A fundamental difference between immigrants of yesteryear and those from shithole countries today is that the former had something to offer. At a certain point in our history, we even selected who could come and who could not. But today, Trump's in trouble for characterizing as shitholes countries where AIDS-infected men rape infants, where farmers are dispossessed of their land (or killed) based on the color of their skin, where people are starving - while just down the road tons of food sit in warehouses.

    Worst of all the average IQ for most of Africa is 65 or less. (

  • BambiB||

    I hope he did say it. It's the truth.

    A fundamental difference between immigrants of yesteryear and those from shithole countries today is that the former had something to offer. At a certain point in our history, we even selected who could come and who could not. But today, Trump's in trouble for characterizing as shitholes countries where AIDS-infected men rape infants, where farmers are dispossessed of their land (or killed) based on the color of their skin, where people are starving - while just down the road tons of food sit in warehouses.

    Worst of all the average IQ for most of Africa is 65 or less. (Less than 70 is clinically "mental retardation".)

    What else would you call a country where the average level of intelligence is mentally retarded? If we were to allow immigration, do we admit the best and brightest of Africa? Pareto theory says that the top 20% will achieve 80% of the improvement. How is strip-mining mental resources good for Africa?

    Or is the proposal that we import people who are mentally retarded? And have them do... what? Go on welfare? Get free medical care? Cost us tons of taxpayer dollars?

    Africa IS a shithole... and it's a shithole of a different kind than we've drawn from before. It's a mental shithole - one big asylum.
    (Reason - your stupid parser can't handle a less-than sign because it thinks it's the beginning of an HTML tag)

  • plusafdotcom||

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    No, everyone deserves everything to be awesome, because… People.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Non-Americans don't deserve anything from America [period]

  • Hugh Akston||

    Neither do Americans, for that matter.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    True. End that welfare state here in America.

  • Tony||

    [period]

    Yuck. Don't you types usually just orgasm when you have a quickie nativist wank?

  • Eric||

    The white bed sheets cover it up nicely.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I have not been to your house to steal your Democrat KKK outfit. Sorry.

  • Old Mexican's Speedos||

    Re: Tony,

    The white supremacists are not even making any pretense that their nativism is fueled by anything else save their animosity those icky brown people. And if they're not, they can stop right now because they're fooling no one. Not anymore.

    Their claim that they are against "Immigruntz Who Takum Er Jebz!" is easily contradicted by the president's predilection for Nordic people (which is interesting because his wife is of Slavic origin) since Norwegians can takum er jebz! just as easily as Nigerians.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The Democrats cannot even hide their racist history of forming the KKK, Jim Crowe laws, slavery, keeping generations of blacks on the government teat, and giving free stuff to immigrants to buy their votes.

  • Holmes IV||

    .............did you even read anything here, or just do a quick search for a gross joke?

  • Red Tony||

    Hey, I personally thought Past Me did a good job with that gross joke.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    These Third World countries are shitholes of their own making or because they wont fight for their own freedom from tyranny.

    The USA is full. Maybe in another decade.

  • Zeb||

    If it's the fault of potential emigrants that their countries suck, then it's your fault that Obama was president for 8 years.

  • Careless||

    If you reduce me to a statistic, sure, I am an American voter.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    It was. I voted for him over McCain and hoped Congress would be Republican to shut his socialist shit down.

  • Eric||

    "I voted for him over McCain"

    *insert emoji for my exploding head*

  • loveconstitution1789||

    McCain would have had a Republican majority in Congress and would have been worse than Obama.

    Unfortunately, Obama got a Democrat Congress for two years and did a bunch of damage like ObamaCare.

  • Eric Bana||

    Why the hell would you vote for Obama?

  • Red Tony||

    Why the hell would you vote for Trump? Because Hillary.

    Why the hell would you vote for Bush? Because Gore.

    Why the hell would you vote for Obama? Because McCain.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Red Tony|1.12.18 @ 5:30PM|#
    Why the hell would you vote for Trump? Because Hillary.
    Why the hell would you vote for Bush? Because Gore.
    Why the hell would you vote for Obama? Because McCain.


    We all know that Red Tony (aka ____ ) votes for lefties every time because they are lefties.

    Principals over principles.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I explained it up above. You lefties sure cannot read well.

  • Kivlor||

    Like it or not, the people in general bear the responsibility for putting him in office. Twice. Even people like me who voted against him. He didn't magically become POTUS. Or take it by force in a coup. Nor was he installed by a foreign government. We'll all bear responsibility for Trump too, even the Californians that didn't vote for him.

    When looking at large numbers of people, we have to make generalized observations because we can't actually know them all and vet them individually.

    Sure, I didn't vote for Obama, but how does Poland know that? My word? "I pinkie swear, I'm totes a capitalist and would never vote for socialism, just let me into your country and let me vote."

  • Zeb||

    Like it or not, the people in general bear the responsibility for putting him in office.

    I don't agree beyond your point about other people's perceptions.

  • Hugh Akston||

    The USA is full.

    Be sure to post that sign in the delivery wards of all hospitals.

  • Tony||

    When they say "the US has enough people," there is of course a missing but understood adjective before "people."

  • Ecoli||

    Leave it to lefties to see all the missing adjectives.

    Insert the missing adjective before "lefties".

  • DiegoF||

    "Village"?

  • Azathoth!!||

    I have to admit that I find it endlessly perplexing that the same people who prattle endlessly about overpopulation take umbrage at those who say things like 'The USA is full' or 'The US has enough people'

    Are you both also adding the non-white variant of your choice before your loathing of people?

  • Tony||

    I never talk about overpopulation. We can't very well genocide our way to sustainability, so what's the point?

  • Ecoli||

    Nature will help us out with our population problem. You can count on it.

  • Tony||

    I don't know what that's supposed to mean.

  • Ecoli||

    It's science, Tony. You fucking love science, don't you?

  • Red Tony||

    Who doesn't love fucking science?

  • The Knuckle||

    And Nebraska, Wyoming and other low populations density states..........

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    What's gonna happen over the next decade!?

  • Lucius Fergeson||

    The Japanese will activate their trap and propagandize all American men into becoming cute anime characters,disarm them, take over our gov't and then they will systematically turn America into the New Japanese Empire, which they will use as a vessel to conquer the rest of the world and unite it under the banner of the Rising Sun.

  • Leader Desslok||

    Damn, you figured out our plans.

  • DiegoF||

    I thought your plan was to propagandize cute but very non-anime-looking American children, arm them, and use them to bomb Pearl Harbor; and merely propagandize all American men into pride in our much larger penises at the expense of awareness of your assault.

  • Leader Desslok||

    That was my second idea. Maybe I'll just go back to my very original plan and use radioactive plant bombs.

  • Rat on a train||

    All I need is Shoe to complete my Chinpokomon set.

  • NYC2AZ||

    The toy industry really needs to start pushing Wild Wacky Action Bike and Alabama Man next Christmas...

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Pretty sure this will be the top seller.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4tfL_oCUPA

  • Bacon-Magic glib reasonoid||

    Operation Weabu.

  • Kivlor||

    This is the real Trump treason that the Democrats will never successfully uncover. Trump was always a Jap puppet, and his promise to make anime real was the true threat to our republic. Weaboos will be free to leave their basements and walk in open public. Cats and dogs living together. Mass hysteria.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    BONZAII

  • buybuydandavis||

    Preferable to being ruled by the Baizuo

    The Japanese have one of the best run countries in the world. Prosperous, free, crime free.

    Of course, I grew up in Hawaii, and back in the day, the Japanese ruled. And it was fine.

  • fatcyst||

    this guy gets it

  • JuanQPublic||

    The USA is full.

    Not really.

    India population: 1.3 billion
    India land mass: 1.27 million sq mi

    China population: 1.4 billion
    China land mass: 3.7 million sq mi

    USA population: 323 million
    USA land mass: 3.8 million sq mi

  • Eric||

    Don't ruin his bumper sticker slogan with your uppity facts.

  • Ecoli||

    Good point. The US is clearly full, as your numbers demonstrate.

  • fatcyst||

    The point is we need time to assimilate what we have already. They need to learn our language. We need people that don't hate our country (whether via propaganda or religion). Also, blacks were more wealthy 50 years ago.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    I'm gonna end every post of mine with, "Also, blacks were more wealthy 50 years ago."

  • fatcyst||

    I am honored

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Health Care was cheaper 50 years ago too, factoring in inflation.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Of course it was. How expensive is it to tell somebody, "You're going to die, you probably want to settle your affairs before it happens."? Telling people they're going to die is dirt cheap, keeping them from dying is expensive.

  • Tony||

    We must stop the hordes of people who hate America from desperately trying to get into America.

  • fatcyst||

    Based

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The Democrats know that their party is over if they cannot get new voters.

    Just like Big Tobacco needs new smokers and socialists need new useful idiots to replace the old useful idiots who died in gulags.

  • JFree||

    Immigrants in the US don't hate the US. They just hate you. And that's probably because you deserve it.

  • fatcyst||

    Fuck off liberal

  • loveconstitution1789||

    China still has plenty of room for Billions more. Oh wait, even the Chinese didn't want more as they instituted a One Child policy some time back.

    The majority of Americans don't want more.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    Damn it LC, what's going to happen over the next decade to free up room in the USA? Do I need to prepare for something!? Also, blacks were more wealthy 50 years ago.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    what's going to happen over the next decade to free up room in the USA?

    It's best we not talk about it openly, at least until most of them are on the trains. Then the "cleansing" can begin, if you know what I mean...

  • Leader Desslok||

    300 million Chinese? Last I heard there were a billion, what happened?

  • Ska||

    Anyone who quotes Red Dawn (the real Red Dawn) is OK in my book.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Spoken like a true socialist jumping to the genocide rather than just altering immigration rules.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There is plenty of physical space in the USA just like there is plenty of physical space in China.

    Because more roads to build up less populated areas is the answer. Food and water supplies. Traffic congestion in urban areas where immigrants tend to go.

    I can't wait for MJGreen's future home of New New York City on top of Yellowstone. It will be great!

    I always laugh at people who cannot say how many people is enough or why American needs more and more people.

  • JuanQPublic||

    China still has plenty of room for Billions more. Oh wait, even the Chinese didn't want more as they instituted a One Child policy some time back.

    Again, not really. The one-child policy was relaxed in rural areas (which China has a lot of) but more strictly enforced in dense urban areas.

    The majority of Americans don't want more

    But that's a non-issue to begin with, as the US population vs land mass doesn't even approach saturation.

  • operagost||

    But the USA is full because we're so fat, LOL.

  • Flyby||

    Ever been to India? I have... and the number of people, everywhere, is hard for most Americans to even conceive. That should not be our goal.

    That said, I would gladly support an immigration policy that prioritized people like many of the wonderful Indians I work with. They are intelligent, educated, law-abiding, and in most every way a net benefit to the country. And they actually admire and like America. And their just as 'brown' as anybody from Mexico. But Democrats don't focus on them because they are not an automatic addition to their voting bloc.

  • Paloma||

    The reason that there are so many everywhere in India is because they lack skyscrapers enough for people to work in, and most of the urban populations are on the street. Japan is much more densely populated than India.

  • dave b.||

    They're shitholes thanks to France and the US

  • CE||

    Full of geezers. The economy could use more young, entrepreneurial workers.

  • callahan2211||

    The more corrupt the nation, the higher its sh!thole index. Most countries that have low perceived corruption are in Northern Europe. The continent with the greatest number of perceived nations that are corrupt is Africa.

  • I can't even||

    So... if they come here and assimilate, fine. If they show up in overwhelming numbers with no plans and no incentive to assimilate, they bring the shithole with them. The Muslim no-go ghettos in Sweden and France are excellent examples of harmful immigration.

  • Eric||

    Key to assimilation is treating them as equals and not as a suspicious underclass.

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    But most of them are evil underclass who seek to soak in the blood of virgins.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    They don't want to be equals.

    Muslims do not want to be European. Therefore they can never be equals to Europeans.

  • Paloma||

    Wait, there's no European Muslims?

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    No good ones that is for sure.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There are now.

  • Deflator Mouse||

    I don't think the Wahabbis consider Albanians and Bosnians to be authentic.

  • GroundTruth||

    This!

  • Azathoth!!||

    The problem, Eric, is that they don't see infidels as 'equals'.

  • Eric||

    I stand by my statement.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Eric does not believe in black holes either. Black holes believe in Eric though.

    As you said Azathoth!!, Muslims don't consider Americans equals no matter what lefty want to think.

  • Deflator Mouse||

    I believe in black holes, like Haiti and Africa.

  • fatcyst||

    Wrong. The key is evolution.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Key to assimilation is treating them as equals and not as a suspicious underclass.

    Indeed, if you follow the logic of "requiring" all sorts of arbitrarily-selected attitudes for immigration, it leads to a logical cul-de-sac.

  • Deflator Mouse||

    Key to assimilation is treating them as equals and not as a suspicious underclass.

    Then it would seem your argument is with those who would provide them with welfare payments, bilingual education, and hate crime legislation.

  • Mark22||

    We have been treating them as equals. For example, we made fun of their religious figures just like we made fun of our religious figures, and the result was Charlie Hebdo and Jylland Posten.

  • David Rairigh||

    Great article Nick. Its worth noting that people with enough willpower to move to another country are probably not those who want to stay on any sort of welfare.

  • fatcyst||

    This place has become a shithole too. Lots of bad info in the article. Yes Indian immigrants and the Dutch do commit less crimes than the black and spanish here, and have higher paying jobs (or even jobs at all). The quality of the immigrant has a lot to do with it. Low IQ third worlders won't contribute anything and will eventually be the downfall of the US.

    David, the immigrants leave their countries because there is no welfare. They go elsewhere because they have it. Check Sweden, Germany, France, Denmark, etc...

  • Hugh Akston||

    So if people with low IQs are the actual problem, what do we do with home-grown morons?

  • Ecoli||

    Send them to Haiti, where they will become the intelligentsia.

  • fatcyst||

    Wasn't the point of my comment or the article. Nice strawman though.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Apparently we have them post on reason under the handle 'hugh akston'

  • Kivlor||

    So if people with low IQs are the actual problem, what do we do with home-grown morons?

    Well the icky alt-right white nationalists generally seem to advocate voluntary sterilization programs, where we pay people to get sterilized before they have kids. Since IQ is heritable at about 80% this would help a lot they claim.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Hmm. Sterilize the underclass. Sounds like a really progressive solution.

  • SimonD||

    Exactly. There's nothing 'right' about the alt-Right, just like there's nothing (or very little) 'Con' about NeoCons. They are just different flavors of Progressives.

  • Flyby||

    We can't do anything about them, but why in the world would you want to import more of them?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The Democrats cannot get smart people to vote for them. If they can only get enough immigrants who they promised them free shit to vote, then Hillary might be Queen finally.

  • Paloma||

    Yes. For some reason these undesirables can move themselves and their families across oceans and deserts for a better life, but meth head hillbillies in Appalachia can't, and need Trump to BRING them GOOD jobs by subsizing some factories near them.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Exactly, now you're getting it. /sarc

  • GroundTruth||

    A fun read too. Glad to see all the facts laid out in a humorous manner. The fact that it is by someone besides Ms. Dalmia furthers the point that this is not just a one-of on the Reason staff.

    Yeah, it was different then.... add to the monikers thrown around: "dumb Swedes" and "bullheaded Prussians". (The latter being how one of my family members referred to our own forebears.) Love was all around and every new boat was greeted with crowds of cheering Americans with flowers and hugs. Right....

    And so much open space! It must have been wonderful. (Sorry about the flu, smallpox, etc. to the folks here in 1491. It really wasn't intentional, just bad luck. Of course, what came afterwards....)

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    We should just deport them all to Europe, where everything is better, and poor people are taken care of.

    Now that you mention it, where's my ticket?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You are bitching that you cannot pay for your own ticket to Europe?

    Figures.

  • MiloMinderbinder||

    They commit crimes at far lower rates than native-born counterparts

    So Gillespie is going to keep repeating that stale, untrue talking point.

    I miss Lanny Friedlander.

  • David Rairigh||

    Yeah, that stale, untrue...
    Oh, wait.
    https://goo.gl/jHBRtB

  • Brightly||

    But the Cato study forgets to account for age, and thus becomes of little use. There is a very strong correlation between age and crime rates, and immigrants tend to be older. If you look at second-generation immigrants, crime goes up significantly.

    http://www.pewresearch.org/fac.....ssimilate/

  • NoVaNick||

    My dad came here from Greece in the 1950s. It was literally a shithole country then, and still is now-apparently, so too are Japan and France:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squat_toilet

  • Ecoli||

    Eastern toilets are dreadful. That was one of the biggest surprises I had when I went to Iraq. The Baghdad international airport literally had (maybe still has) a hole in the floor into which you took a shit. It was a literal shithole.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Saw that changing planes in Japan once. Thank goodness they also had real toilets for the tourists.

  • DiegoF||

    I think the Asian toilets are a better idea, actually. Takes some getting used to, but I think squatting is a better system than dirty-ass sitting. The Orientals probably say, I can't believe those filthy Westerners actually put their buttocks on those things in common.

  • Ecoli||

    Have you ever hovered your ass over a several-ton pile of fermenting human shit, gasping for breath while trying to quickly squeeze out a turd? It is not a pleasant experience. Not to mention that it is difficult to read a magazine while while doing so.

  • DiegoF||

    That is a malfunctioning toilet. I am attacking the sitting posture, not the concept of flush plumbing.

    I have opened a Porta-Potty door on the fifth day of a festival to be greeted by the very sight you describe. I assure you, I did not merrily venture in, thinking, ah, at least I can sit down on it.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Until you have traveled to a shithole country and refused to shake the wipe hand of a local, you know nothing Jon Snow.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Yeah--the people in countries with a life expectancy of 40 do it, so it must be.....wait......those countries are still ravaged by cholera as well........and have huge segments of the population that crap in the street--by preference.

    Yeah. It must be US that have it wrong.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Indoor plumbing and other modern sanitation methods have not only cut down on the spread of diseases like typhus, cholera, polio, dysentery, smallpox, etc. but raised life expectancy.

  • Zeb||

    People who use squat toilets tend not to get hemorrhoids either.

  • Ecoli||

    They get fried off by the acidic fumes wafting over their nether regions.

    And... We exceptional Americans have a fix for the hemorrhoid problem:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbYWhdLO43Q

  • DiegoF||

    You keep going back to the fumes, which have nothing whatsoever to do with the style of toilet. You had a bad experience with one particular squat toilet, which very obviously has everything to do with its absurdly poor maintenance and nothing to do with its prescribed posture type. In essence, you are a toilet racist. And the need for this "squatty potty" accessory just affirms the inadequacy of the sitting modality. It is like ethnic eye or nose surgery.

  • Ecoli||

    P traps, buddy. That explains the whole problem with Eastern toilets. They have no P trap between the anus and the pile of turds.

    If you think the only difference between eastern toilets and western toilets is posture, then I suspect you have never taken a shit in Baghdad.

  • DiegoF||

    Oh so it's the p traps. Yes, of course, if that's what you were talking about then certainly.

    But I reiterate. That is orthogonal to the "Eastern" versus "Western" distinction, which is how you started off your first comment characterizing and have again reiterated with this very one. If you meant to call toilets with modern plumbing (as I mentioned earlier) "Eastern" and the other "Western," that is simply not how anyone else would understand the term. Here we have porta potties, and we have "composting toilets" that look like standard toilets, as well as the modern advanced toilets which, like all our drains, have P traps.

    P traps are a mark of modern plumbing period, not East versus West. Easterners living under modern conditions have P traps on their drains including their toilets like anyone else. You went to a toilet in Baghdad fucking Airport and you start making proclamations about what "Eastern toilets" are like? Do you really think the Japanese, for example, would put up with the conditions you describe? Even modernized areas in poor Asian countries have P traps on all the drains.

    I'm passionate about this, damn it!

  • DiegoF||

    toilets with modern plumbing (as I mentioned earlier) "Eastern"


    Correction: obviously the other way around

  • JFree||

    I'm passionate about this, damn it!

    You almost sound German - like those toilets with the poop inspection shelf.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Those shitholes are also great for hiding from the Nazis and Communists when they comes for you.

  • DiegoF||

    The barefoot-running fad turned out to be full of shit, I believe; but the superficially similar "squatting is natural" hippies, if I'm not mistaken, do seem to be demonstrated to have a point. And they really are right that kids do it naturally. I had to use a sketchy communal toilet as a toddler in the old country, and, even though I was of course potty-trained in the Western tradition, I moved to a squat pretty much without thinking about it. Surprised I never fell in!

  • Nuwanda||

    Back off. When I take dump I require--nay, I demand--a full on, Star Spangled, perfumed ablutionary experience.

    Heated seat. Fold-out tray for magazine, laptop and a snack if I should be in the mood. Three ply paper with 20% cotton (South Park pattern), and a footrest.

    And a buzzer to summon the attendant.

  • Mark22||

    You haven't been in Japan recently, have you? Japanese toilets are Western-shaped affairs, but they wash, massage, and blow-dry your asshole while playing music, all computer controlled with AI and fuzzy logic.

  • El Oso||

    the famous Eastern Hammam

  • El Oso||

    the famous Eastern Hammam

  • El Oso||

    the famous Eastern Hammam

  • El Oso||

    the famous Eastern Hammam

  • El Oso||

    the famous Eastern Hammam

  • El Oso||

    the famous Eastern Hammam

  • El Oso||

    the famous Oso Fuckup

  • DiegoF||

    the famous Eastern Hammam

  • Eric||

    They have those "holes" in much of Europe as well. Good aim is important.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Never saw a shithole in Western Europe. Italy, yup. Eastern Europe, yup.

  • NoVaNick||

    Was in Paris back around 2000 and did see one in a bar. They also still had "pissoirs" -outdoor public troughs for men to urinate.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, those are great. My favorite is in Antwerp where you actually piss on the cathedral.

  • Mcgoo95||

    You sure that wasn't Brussels?

  • poptart||

    First one I saw was in London.

    And Italy is Western Europe.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Italy is Southern Europe. Just like Sweden is Northern Europe.

  • NoVaNick||

    They are pretty rare in Greece now-at least in the cities, tourist areas, and all the homes I've been in. I did see one at a restaurant back in the mid 1990s and they weren't common then either.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    a hole in the floor into which you took a shit. It was a literal shithole.

    I've heard the same about Russia. Apparently the country we were supposed to be shitting our pants in fear of throughout the cold war, and shitting our pants in fear of now because of their super hackers, never figured out toilets.

  • Ecoli||

    All Americans should emigrate en mass to all the shitholes of the world, just swap places, and set things right. We are exceptional. We would turn things around.

  • Bacon-Magic glib reasonoid||

    Great idea, you first.

  • Ecoli||

    I am taking you with me. Somebody has to carry the luggage and prepare the evening cocktails.

  • Bacon-Magic glib reasonoid||

    Racist! How did you know I was ethnic? Do you have some kind of potential progressive voter radar?

  • DiegoF||

    He didn't. He just knew you weren't Jewish, and therefore wouldn't poison him.

  • Ecoli||

    I just assumed it because you submissively sent me to the head of the line.

  • Bacon-Magic glib reasonoid||

    RACISTS!

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I'm part Native American, so I will stay here and tell bonfire stories of those ancient Americans who traded places with the Road Warriors.

    Get it? We don't have any modern conveniences and have to tell bonfire stories again.

  • dave b.||

    You're not. Every white person in the US claims phony Native ancestry that doesn't exist. Most of them are $5 Indians who paid $5 to get on the Dawes Rolls to get free land from the government. Actual, real Natives were dark skinned and were forced to classify as black so they didn't get shit.

  • DiegoF||

    If I were such a person I'd mack on the squaws by asking if they wanted a $5 footlong.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I guess my being a member of the Cherokee Nation doesn't count.

    Some of my ancestors were forced into white schools and punished if they spoke their native language.

    But hey, you have the super ability of Skepticism.

  • dave b.||

    The government used the Dawes rolls to determine who was a member of each tribe, which is why to this day whites are official card-carrying members of tribes of which they have near zero ancestry. This means you.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Probably because Americans Indians didn't write shit down, you dummy. History was passed via the elders through oral tradition.

    Educated Cherokee later did write down events to pass them on, which is what my family has.

    But hey, you cling to your desire to undermine all American Indian historical record. It will work great for Democrats in upcoming presidential elections.

  • dave b.||

    Whatever you have to tell yourself about your phony native ancestry, like every other white person. The Dawes rolls determine the official historical record, and whites paid to be on the rolls to get free land. Natives didn't trust the government for obvious reasons, so many actual Natives aren't on the rolls so the white government enrolled other whites as Natives to get free shit.

    To this day many tribes are controlled by whites and alleged natives with 1/1000% ancestry. Natives at the time weren't even allowed to miscegenate with whites so I find it very strange that virtually every white American claims some Native ancestry. Sell that shit somewhere else

    PS. I'm not a Democrat and don't give a single fuck about what they do next election

  • DiegoF||

    You have taken a core truth--that many whites paid to get on the Dawes rolls, and that many Indians were fearful to do so and did not get enrolled--and surrounded it with so much exaggerated, foil-hat shit with no mooring in reality that it's hard to tell if this is a parody account.

  • DiegoF||

    You have taken a core truth--that many whites paid to get on the Dawes rolls, and that many Indians were fearful to do so and did not get enrolled--and surrounded it with so much cartoonishly exaggerated, foil-hat shit with no mooring in fact or reality that it's hard to tell if this is a parody account.

  • DiegoF||

    See, I meant that so much I said it twice and added another word!

  • dave b.||

    Where is the "exaggerated, foil-hat shit"? This is directly from the Natives themselves. Just because you don't want to hear the truth doesn't mean it's a conspiracy.

    "Five-dollar Indians passed their unearned benefits to heirs who still lay claim to tribal citizenship and associated privileges."

    "Now we have people who are white but who can trace their names back to the rolls used by tribal nations to ascertain who has rights as citizens," he said. "That means we have white people who have the ability to vote at large; it means political rights; it means the potential to influence tribal policy on a whole range of issues; it means people have access to health care, education and employment. The implications are quite profound for people who got away with fraud."

    "In 1900, one woman registered on the rolls with 1/256 Cherokee blood, Norris said. Now, some enrolled members of the Cherokee Nation have as little as 1/8,196 Indian blood."

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Dave, sell your shit somewhere else.

    There's another great invention called DNA which further contradicts all your nonsense.

  • dave b.||

    If only DNA testing existed before your ancestors were able to scam their way into free land and benefits. I'd be willing to bet a substantial sum of money that you're less than 5% native ancestry.

  • JFree||

    So you and Warren are like kissin cousins

  • Mark22||

    So you are an American with special privileges. Why do you think anybody should give a f*ck?

  • Brett Bellmore||

    The "so what", is that when an immigrant comes here, they don't enjoy an immaculate rebirth, shedding all remnants of their original culture. They bring where they came from with them.

    And "You are what you eat." applies as much to immigration as food. Every time somebody immigrates here from Haiti, the US becomes a little bit more like Haiti.

    And that's so even if the people fleeing Haiti don't mean to recreate here what they fled from. They still bring with them the culture and values that made the place they fled what it was.

  • Tony||

    You forgot to say why that's bad.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Thank you. I was wondering the same thing.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    He didn't say it was bad dumb dumb.

    He is discussing how a country like the USA can absorb the best parts of Haitian culture but still be the USA rather than the USA become a lot more like Haiti. The culture transfer can be unintentional.

    Historically, America has absorbed nearly every culture there is and still mostly assimilated immigrants to be "Americans". If not the immigrants than the 2nd generation tends to be very assimilated into American culture.

  • Zeb||

    So this is the new thing now?? "Everyone from shitty countries is a shitty person"? Why is that the case now, but wasn't when Europe was largely a shithole and most immigrants came from there?

    Now I miss "I'm only opposed to illegal immigration".

  • fatcyst||

    I'd rather block some good people out than let in a bunch of shitty people (theres a lot more of the latter)

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Its not that everyone from a shitty country is a shitty person but trends tell us that contemporary immigrants are bringing their shitty socialist beliefs with them to the USA.

    Plus, I think Americans are sick of all this propaganda that all immigrants are angels and we cannot have a discussion about immigration or tighten US borders without Americans being called racists.

    Americans have a funny way of fighting back when attacked.

    I get why open border types are fine with open borders. Why do the lefties want a flood of immigrants into the USA? Answer that and you see the left's motive is not charity for those less fortunate.

  • Mark22||

    If you advocate open borders with country X then it matters how shitty country X is on average. That is, we're having this discussion only because some idiots think open borders are a good idea.

    Sensible people want race-blind, skill-based immigration using objective criteria and verifiable documentation; with that, we wouldn't have to concern ourselves with what the average Haitian or average German or average Mexican is like.

  • JuanQPublic||

    The "so what", is that when an immigrant comes here, they don't enjoy an immaculate rebirth, shedding all remnants of their original culture. They bring where they came from with them.


    (Bold added for emphasis)

    You've pretty much described the story of American culture from day one.

  • fatcyst||

    But Americans dont have culture
    /Sarc

  • JuanQPublic||

    And "You are what you eat." applies as much to immigration as food. Every time somebody immigrates here from Haiti, the US becomes a little bit more like Haiti.

    As opposed to being more like, what?

    In case you haven't noticed, throughout the history if the U.S., it's culture has been largely formed by a combination of exterior influences. So when an American goes and fills their fat ass with Fazoli's or Olive Garden, there's an external reason for why "Italian food" is so popular in America.

    There's a reason why bluegrass music sounds an awful lot like Irish music. There's a reason why there's so much "French stuff" in New Orleans. There's a reason why the Vikings are the Minnesota mascot.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Yes, I perfectly well understand that, and the real question, unless you've already decided we have to have open borders regardless of the consequences, is what we what the country to be more like in the future.

    Some people apparently aspire to be more like Mexico or Haiti. I'm not clear why we'd aspire to that.

  • Texasmotiv||

    I've met a lot of Mexican immigrants, we could do a lot worse than Mexican immigrants.

    You seem to be acting like assimilation isn't a thing. People are usually fully assimilated by the 2nd or 3rd generation.

    Are there bad effects to mass immigration like what is going on in Europe? Surely! These are mostly due to the fact that these are largely people who are not selectively leaving their country but are fleeing conflicts or unrest elsewhere. Any plans of housing massive populations of refugees and asylum seekers need to be balanced against the receiving community's ability to absorb the shock culturally and economically.

    That said, the positive benefits to immigration cannot be simply ignored. Even after the initial shock your institutions change and adapt and the assimilation into the community creates positive benefits for the community from economic boons to cultural enrichment.

    I don't like the state of immigration debate because it seems to be fought between Open-borders Ideologues who make lofty moral arguments and flat economic arguments (which I am sympathetic to) against Cultural Luddites who focus too sharply on the initial shock.

    I admit I am closer to the Open-immigration side myself but am not blind to the downsides and hardships that people experience and the dangers of a European refugee situation.

  • Flyby||

    I generally agree Texasmotiv, but assimilation is hampered when you bring huge numbers from a single area. And that's a large part of the issue with illegal immigration from our southern border, in that the number of immigrants from one region are represented far out of proportion to what would be healthy for the receiving country. Those on the left love to say how diversity is a strength, but the reality is this type of migration is not making the country more diverse, it's making it more Mexican. Those are two different things.

    There was an interesting study put out last year showing the larger the number of immigrants from one country, the lower their wages tend to be in the U.S. So truly diversifying the mix of immigrants would be beneficial to us, and to those who are allowed to immigrate.

  • Texasmotiv||

    That is an interesting conclusion, though I'm skeptical of how you could tease out the lack of diversity as the causal factor, but having not seen of this I will plead ignorance on this (a link would sincerely be appreciated). It seems like if you go too far with that conclusion it brings you into Utilitarian-land to "affirmative action-ing" your immigration policy and that just seems like it may have some unintended negative consequences.

    I can see what you are saying with the large amounts of Mexican illegal immigrants where southwestern states are being heavily influenced by Mexican culture. It's hard to say whether or not Mexican culture taking over is better or worse for these states however. There is no alternate history we can look at where Mexicans had no interest in coming back into Texas and compare with now. I know you list the wages argument but im not convinced Texas' economy for example would be better off without the labor influxes from the Mexican population.

    I guess my point is really that there is no definite good, or definite bad in all this. When its close, or unproven I tend to err on the side of the individual rights argument involving freedom of movement.

    Illegal immigration is kind of another beast and there are ways to alleviate those issues that aren't being talked about. It seems to be the D response of "fugeddabowdit" or the R response of "Build a wall".

  • Mark22||

    An "economic boon" for who? Low skill immigrants are consuming more in government resources than they pay in taxes; that means higher taxes for me and bigger deficits for the US. If other people benefit from their presence, then you're merely using low-skill immigrants to take money out of my pocket and subsidize agribusinesses or other beneficiaries of low skill immigration.

    There are easy way to converge towards a libertarian immigration system and to avoid immigration to be used for rent seeking: require any immigrant to pay the average per capita government spending for US citizens every year. Conveniently, the more libertarian we become, the closer that amount gets to zero.

  • JuanQPublic||

    But bringing in lots of people from one geographic area is a separate issue to immigration in general, and being that so many immigrants come from Mexico already, to say that being like Mexico is a reality or some sort of "aspiration" doesn't hold any water, because neither is true.

    The U.S. is nothing like Mexico, and anyone who thinks it is needs to travel or talk to Mexicans more.

  • Tony||

    I thought the "Haitians all have AIDS" thing was worse than this, but I guess it wasn't verified (until now).

    I suppose it's far too much to ask of (nominally) white racist fucktards who went all the way from idiot spoiled rich kid to idiot spoiled president, and his slack-jawed followers, to grasp the actual idea of America. That perhaps their cousinfucking ways are not the apex of humanity, and that people come here because we have good schools and an advanced society, and that even if their countries are shitholes, the point is they were motivated enough to come here and make their lives better, thus making all our lives better.

    Of course it is. People who fuck their cousins and the president they support all for some inexplicable reason think that their deranged lifestyle is the best. If not the best, at least what they're used to. And God didn't put them on this earth to encounter ideas or people who are different. That is, in fact, why they fuck their cousins.

  • Ecoli||

  • Helvetica Standard||

    When will Tony retire the "fuck their cousins" shtick? Enjoy whatever diverse wonderland you live in, presumably Minneapolis or St. Louis.

  • Tony||

    I haven't decided on a new shtick. I mean, there's an obvious hilarity about morbidly obese semi-literate hillbillies with the nuts to call other people unworthy of this country. At least the Nazis worked out and got haircuts.

  • JuanQPublic||

    At least the Nazis worked out and got haircuts.

    I don't know. Goering could've cut back on the bratwurst.

  • Brian||

    We all can't live the sophisticated life of the liberal arts major in Tulsa.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Even funnier is that Nazis were socialists just like modern socialists but with a genocidal racist flair rather than just being racist socialists.

  • You're Kidding||

    So Tony, not only do you conjure up hateful stereo types about people from the Appalachians to bolster your point, you go on to extend discrimination against fat people as being preferable to Nazism to make your point.

    I'm not sure if we should exile you to Cumberland Gap or Boise to help adjust your attitudes.

  • Rhywun||

    Shhh, he's on a roll. Let him enjoy his little moment on his high horse. Maybe he'll wear himself out and need a couple days of rest to recover.

  • Ecoli||

    Why do you hate the Amish?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Almost 2% of Haitians have AIDS, so not "all" but more than none.

  • Tony||

    Well, there's only one person in this little story who referred either to "all" or "none."

  • loveconstitution1789||

    All socialists love to make sure that everyone has none-thing.

  • Mark22||

    True: all socialists are evil, 100% of them.

  • fatcyst||

    Also "estimated". Wonder if its the same who estimated Hillary's 99%?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    their cousinfucking ways are not the apex of humanity

    Let it sink into your mind that these useless, slack-jawed cousinfuckers are the descendants of decent people that came to America long ago. Let it sink in as you see the future.

  • Tony||

    Perhaps in the future some other country bordered largely by oceans will reap the benefits of selective migration of particularly industrious white Americans to its shores.

  • Ecoli||

    Japan?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    I wonder if said county will have a leader decrying the importation of slack-jawed cousinfuckers because of what it will do to the culture.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Canada?

  • Cynical Asshole||

    The whole point of America is that it doesn't matter where you come from. It matters what you do when you're here.

    I have it on "good authority" that the only thing immigrants do once they get here is collect welfare, steal jobs from white people, and promote Marxist ideologies. Especially the brown ones.

  • Helvetica Standard||

    They are forgetting that the Haitians genocided the white folks living there in 1804.

  • Eric||

    To be fair the white folks did it first in 1492.

  • Helvetica Standard||

    Yes, my mistake. I tend to forget that it's okay to perform revenge acts over 300 years after the fact.

  • dave b.||

    So the niggers should have stayed slaves instead of overthrowing their oppressor? That's very white of you. Remember, when the whites come in and murder and enslave everyone, they're the valiant conquerors. When the blacks overthrow the oppression, it's revenge.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Didn't Africans enslave other Africans for the slave trade?

    Didn't Egyptians enslave Jews and everyone?

    Didn't American Indian tribes butcher women and children?

    Life was tough centuries ago and slavery was rampant. The only slavers are lefty socialists and life is quite a bit better for most humans.

  • dave b.||

    I see your public school indoctrination is coming along well. African slavery was nothing close to white slavery. Africans didn't break up families, force white identity and language on slaves, rape an entire population of light-skinned blacks into place, and murder slaves for the crime of knowing how to read. And entire books have been written on the atrocities committed against the natives, mostly rape and murder by whites in the name of God. But nice try to spin it as the Natives were the killers.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Jesus Christ, are you trying to lefty-splain slavery?

    If your lefty education was better, you would have been able to read that my comment fully where I discuss how slavery was a way of life before Europe got rid of slavery and the US Civil War.

    Trying to guilt European white descendants into being sad for some of their ancestors owning slaves like nearly all other races around the World before them just is not working anymore.

  • dave b.||

    I'm not a leftist, so sorry for breaking your phony left/right paradigm. American blacks and formerly colonized countries still deal with the effects of slavery to this day, not to mention how much whites have benefited from all the stolen land and free labor

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Phony, huh? So you're a libertarian who agrees that people should not be responsible for their own actions because. ____________ (fill in victim reason)?

  • dave b.||

    Being subjugated for 400+ years and having your resources stolen is victimhood? I agree that the colonizer should be responsible for their actions from their generations of theft, slavery, murder, apartheid etc.

  • Mark22||

    I didn't colonize anybody. None of my ancestors colonized anybody or subjugated anybody; instead, they were religiously persecuted all across Europe.

    It's f*cking racists like you who judge people by the color of their skin.

  • VinniUSMC||

    "African slavery was good slavery"...

    Interesting.

  • Mark22||

    Your history is messed up. Slavery was nearly universal across the globe in the 18th century.

    Millions of Europeans were enslaved by Muslims and Africans.

    The vast majority of African slaves coming to the Americas were enslaved by the Spanish and ended up in South America, by the very same hispanics that "the whites" are supposedly oppressing now as well.

    Muslims, Africans, and many Asians practice slavery to this day.

    What distinguishes "the whites" is that they are the only major group that ever abolished slavery and promoted universal human rights across the globe. Without "the whites", the world would still be as miserable, poor, and violent as it was during the Dark Ages.

  • JFree||

    300 years? The life expectancy of a slave in Haiti then was less than 10 years and unlike the US the slave population was 65-70% male and very few children/families - and most had been born in Africa and captured there and transported. Just import more and work them to death. During the 10 years of war from the time they were legally emancipated to the time they actually won their freedom - 200,000 slaves (40%) were killed (mostly violently) fighting against the British (40,000 dead - mostly disease) and French (70,000 - mostly disease) armies at different times but always fighting those armies who were defending slavery on behalf of the 40,000 or so slaveowners.

    The massacre of unevacuated whites in 1804 amounted to prob 5000. That massacre was personal revenge for them being captured in Africa, transported across the ocean, worked to death in the field, getting killed fighting for their freedom, and preventing yet more invasion waves of European armies to keep trying to enslave them. 1492 had fuckall to do with it

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Haitians have buyers remorse. They fought for their freedom from slavery and have done shit with for centuries.

    Americans fought for their freedom from British slavery and created the most successful democratic nation the human race has ever seen.

    It causes jealousy and envy when you create something good and the losers want to destroy what you have.

  • dave b.||

    Did you miss where Haiti was cut off from trade from the US and forced to pay billions in reparations to France? And did I miss where the British enslaved Americans? This is unprecedented levels of whitesplaining

  • loveconstitution1789||

    So it's America's fault? Didn't think so. America doesn't have to trade with any country nor accept in any immigrants.

    If we know anything from history, reparations are never paid off no matter how much trade with the USA you might have.

    Germany has never paid off its reparations to the Allies after WWI. Germany has never paid off its reparations to the USSR. Cuba has never paid off its debt to the USSR.

  • dave b.||

    What happened in Haiti is the logical outcome of losing your largest trading partner and having nearly all of your natural resources and economy stolen by France to the tune of $21 billion dollars. White countries get away with not paying reparations. African and Caribbean countries, not so much.

  • JFree||

    Those reparations - which were illegal under French law even in 1825 and was twice what the US paid for the Louisiana Purchase - were being paid by Haiti until 1947 when they finally did paid it off.

  • JFree||

    Oh - and for the Haitians - they had about 30x more killed in battle during their revolution than we did during ours - in a population that was 1/6th the size. Comparing our revolution to theirs is like comparing ours to Stalingrad or Verdun

  • JFree||

    Those Haitian reparations which the Bourbons also imposed in France (for those emigres who lost during the French Revolution) the same year they imposed them on Haiti - was about a quarter of those French reparations. The difference is that the French paid them for 5 years until they overthrew the Bourbons for a second time. Haitians paid those reparations for 120 years.

  • dave b.||

    The dirty secret about the French is that they are still forcing their ex-colonies to pay reparations

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Didn't Haiti elect a tyrant in 1957?

  • dave b.||

    Did you mean 'Didn't the whites colonize Haiti for generations, force them to pay 21 Billion in reparations, and then prop up a western-educated puppet dictator and his son in 1957'?

  • You're Kidding||

    There are three kinds of people in this world:

    Moochers
    Looters
    Producers

    They come in all shapes and flavors.

    Sadly, Haiti remains in the hands of the first two.

  • Zeb||

    I can forgive a lot of killing of people who are keeping their killers as slaves. I'm pretty sure killing the person who enslaves you is OK under the NAP.

  • Paloma||

    Haiti was the next country to win its independence from its colonizers. The French did a lot of killing of their own in the French Revolution.

  • fatcyst||

    Is the NAP generational?

  • Zeb||

    Not unless they are still keeping you as a slave in the next generations. I don't know a lot about that history. Just saying that slaves rising up and killing the slavers is OK.

    I am very much against holding people responsible for the bad acts of their ancestors.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Old generational beefs are why Europe and most of the World cannot move on and have a peaceful and rich country like the USA can.

    Descendants of slaves participate in our Democracy. Even American Indians are participants in our rich nation. There is nobody alive in the USA today who owned slaves or participated in genocide of American Indians, so there is nobody alive that can be held responsible.

  • chemjeff||

    Actually, no they didn't.

    They did execute all the remaining French once they won their revolution.

    However, they spared a battallion of Polish soldiers who had come to fight alongside the French to put down the rebellion, because the Polish soldiers saw what the French would do if they had won - reinstitute slavery - said no, because something similar was happening to Poles back in Poland and their struggle against Russia, and switched sides.

    I think it would make a good movie, actually.

  • Deflator Mouse||

    Adam Sandler is a Polish lieutenant who learns French and goes to Haiti to fight the slaves.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    We all have roots elsewhere.

    I guess Native Americans don't count.

  • Tony||

    This was once a "shithole country" too. Thanks smallpox!

  • Rhywun||

    Um... they have roots elsewhere too.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    I suppose if you want to get technical, anyone who lives anywhere other than the rift valley in Africa where Homo Sapiens first evolved is descended from immigrants.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Since we've gotten to the point where people are calling you an 'immigrant' even if your family's been in a place for half a millennium, you're damned right we're gonna get technical.

    Unless you live on the continent where humanity evolved, you're an immigrant.

  • Ecoli||

    Yep! Live by the epithet, die by the epithet.

  • Leader Desslok||

    Speak for your self, my descendants came over on the Colonial fleet.

  • Eric||

    "I guess Native Americans don't count."

    And they immigrated from Asia during the last ice age. Nativism relies on short historical timelines.

  • Zeb||

    We're all just basically jumped up fish.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    They call me fish who walks on land.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Native Americans' ancestors emigrated through Beringia tens of thousands of years ago. There are no hominids native to North America.

  • Zeb||

    Oh, yeah? What about Sasquatch?

  • Cynical Asshole||

    STEVE SMITH NATIVE TO NORTH AMERICA, BUT STEVE SMITH RAPE EVERYONE TO DEATH EONS AGO. HAD TO WAIT FOR MORE PEOPLE TO SHOW UP BEFORE STEVE SMITH COULD RAPE MORE.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Sasquatch is a gigantopithecus variant.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Oh yeah, what about Tony?

  • Zeb||

    How many native Americans are there now who don't have any ancestors from the Old World? I have no idea.

  • JFree||

    No full-blood native Americans (still many millions - not in the US though) have current close relatives anywhere in the Old World. The closest haplotype (still Q) to pre-Beringian is to a now extinct group of Siberians who lived in the Yenisei/Krasnoyarsk area - with a precursor haplotype to the Turkmen and Thailand/Indonesia. So while they crossed the Bering strait that is no more genetically meaningful than saying they are human. They are as different from Chinese or current Siberians as those two are from each other or either are from Europeans or Bushmen.

    Most of the attempt to put them into a box of 'you came from somewhere else too' was a European justification to take their land by coercion and deny them their cultural identity.

  • Zeb||

    That's not what I meant to ask. I'm wondering how many truly full blooded native Americans there are.

  • JFree||

    By full-blood native Americans you mean US? Prob 1 million or less. That's the population still on reservations. But guatemala (30% of pop), mexico (10% of population), bolivia (20%), etc - lots

  • Azathoth!!||

    There aren't any.

    The people called 'native Americans' came here from Asia.

  • brec||

    People come here because they think it's going to be better than where they're from.

    It was true of all of my grandparents and all of your ancestors, too, if you're American. We all have roots elsewhere.


    Well, yes, I am white. Is this true of all H&R readers?

  • Helvetica Standard||

    No, I am part Huron and my ancestors were destroyed by European colonists.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There are a couple of you in the wood pile.

    DNA race tracings show there was more inter-racial stuff going on than previously admitted.

  • Paloma||

    Technically most Black people's ancestors didn't come here willingly. But I suppose the slave traders and plantation owners thought THEIR lives would be better.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Slave decedents In America are better off now than Africans.

    As a matter of fact, Jews are better off now after have been slaves to Egyptians those millennia ago.

  • Tony||

    Don't you people blame blacks for being lazy while at the same time blaming Jews for controlling everything? Why are you so hard to please?

  • Bacon-Magic glib reasonoid||

    What do you mean by "you people"?

  • Texasmotiv||

    He forgot where he was an thought he was at Breitbart. I can't blame him though, so did loveconstitution1789.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Unlike you lefties who love to be racist, a lazy person is a lazy person. Who cares what color skin they have.

    Just like applicants to colleges. Who cares what color skin they have and let them compete to get in.

    Jews don't control everything. They don't control me. Mazel Tov!

  • Ron||

    it took a while but their lives are better here now then back there hence the reason they keep coming here and no one goes back.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Many people are ignorant of history, so they don't realize that every nearly every race of people was enslaved and/or enslaved others. Life was harsh and luckily, freedom and free market has helped the lives of billions of modern humans.

    We all had to start somewhere and through hard work and learning from history we can avoid the mistakes of the past. Slavery and socialism are some of the mistakes.

  • Old Mexican's Speedos||

    I'm fair skinned. My family is part Spanish and part Lebanese with a pinch of Irish.

    Saying that people come from "shithole" countries is merely a hidden insult towards INDIVIDUALS who were born in those countries. That's called "Being A Bigot".

  • Kivlor||

    Saying there are general identifiable trait trends between Border Collies and Bulldogs is bigoted. Those are just subjective classifications. Every dog is an individual, and it is wrong to judge or make assumptions or generalities about them by their breed

  • Kivlor||

    **Trend differences

  • Paloma||

    There are way more genetic differences between border collies and bulldogs than there are between the Queen of England, the Emperor of Japan, and the Haitian ambassador to the UN.

  • You're Kidding||

    Very true.

    But at least one of those countries is still a shithole.

    The reference that inspired this screed was to the condition of certain countries and not necessarily any individual that lives there. Except of course, to the phobic mind that looks for an "ism" in any statement made by this, and virtually any other general statement about a place on earth.

  • Mark22||

    I'm an actual immigrant, and I don't take it personally when people refer to my birth country as a "shithole country".

    The fact that you do merely means that you are projecting your own racism and bigotry onto others.

  • fatcyst||

    Yes and you need to compare to current day:
    USA from Ireland... perhaps
    USA from Africa... definitely

  • DiegoF||

    What about USA FOR AFRICA?

  • fatcyst||

    Rhodesia did very well.. for a while. Outside of there and SA, probably shitty but I dont know much more about it.

  • JFree||

    I totally agree with Gillespie - and Trump. All our ancestors came from shitholes - and the ones who came here were generally the ones getting shat on at the lowest point. Applies to my Swedish dagsverkstorp, my Scottish POW-transport, my Huguenot leave-or-die, and the slew of other indentured servants, religiously oppressed, economically indebted, and FYTW criminalized ancestors. And the same thing applies today.

    My main problems with our immigration policy are:
    I don't think the entry decisions should be made entirely by families bringing in relatives and/or connected employers. I think they are a legitimate political decision where the framework should be set by us all as citizens. And personally I think we need more immigrants - but a LOT less cronyism.

    We create a foreign policy problem if our immigration decisions encourage those source countries to remain shitholes or even get more oppressive. Emigration is a safety valve for oppressive regimes - and that sure as hell shouldn't then become our 2nd problem. So - maybe wider distribution of source countries so none dominate the flow.

  • DiegoF||

    Also migration that is too rapid causes a watering down of the native sociopolitical culture with the foreign newcomers, even where slower migration would have caused the newcomers simply to assimilate. We see that even with domestic immigration, to the South, when looking at voting patterns. The slower migration only increases the population of "Southerners," whereas the faster waters down the "Southern" character of the area under study.

    Though it is true that during the 19th century the US absorbed utterly enormous numbers of immigrants often from political values that were incredibly far from our own, often non English speaking, almost uniformly far poorer than those that come here today. Changed the makeup of our country far more dramatically and quickly than anything seen since. Worth looking into to determine how we made it out OK nonetheless.

  • JFree||

    19th century kind of shows to me that the pace of migration doesn't itself do much re assimilation. True assimilation is a two-generation process anyway - marry outside your ethnicity/culture so that you have to choose to decide how to raise the kids. Those kids then get raised 'American'. Which doesn't work if the already-Americans are just exploiting the shit out of the immigrants - because the last thing the immigrants will then do is have any interest in becoming just like the Americans.

    For the first generation let mobility work - spread migration around widely. A neighborhood with Polish/Croat/Welsh/Mexican/Chinese/Thai/Somalians will very quickly learn to speak English and lose their baggage. A neighborhood with a single origin will fester in whatever baggage/victimhood they brought from the old country.

  • You're Kidding||

    Cuba for example?

  • Stormy Dragon||

    During the recent Bronx apartment fire, Private Emmanuel Mensah repeatedly went back into the burning building, saving four people before dying while attempting to save a fifth:

    After Saving Many From Fire, Soldier Died Trying to Rescue One More

    He immigrated from Ghana five years ago.

  • fatcyst||

    Ghana is english speaking so they assimilate pretty well and generally respect Americans and their way of life.

  • Azathoth!!||

    And Ghana is a shithole.

    No one said that HE was a shithole--despite the media's desperate spin.

  • Leader Desslok||

    There you go clouding the issue with logic again.

  • fatcyst||

    Was reason usurped by lefties? I had a feeling during the election it was coming...

    Either that or the mask came off.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There are few lefties floating around here.

    You can pick them out quickly.

    They hate it when you remind them that Nazis ARE socialists too.

  • Tony||

    Of course what Trump's addled mind fails to grasp is that his sentiment is unpatriotic in the extreme. The traditional patriotic idea is that America is so great that people want to come here and take advantage of its greatness.

    But then he's been saying this whole time that he wants to restore a greatness that has been lost (presumably thanks to a certain immigrant from a certain shithole called Kenya). Forget it. It all makes so much more sense when you replace "great" with the original "white."

  • Texasmotiv||

    If American greatness is predicated on no one coming into the country to "mess it up", it must have not been that great to begin with.

    I, for one, have more trust in our cultural institutions and social resilience.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You clearly have not been paying attention to demographics changing voting patterns.

  • retiredfire||

    Lefties don't want to go there, since it exposes their real motive.

  • Ron||

    Yes these other nations are shitholes that does not mean the people are shit and Trump didn't say that. so just because someone is from a shit hole why should we let them in at all or anyone for that matter.

  • chemjeff||

    I spent a fair amount of time arguing with the Trumpists on this issue yesterday (yes I was procrastinating again). And evidently they really do believe in the absurd reductionist idea that if a country is a "shithole", it's because the citizens of that country are shitty people. This is so absurdly reductionist and we know that they themselves don't even believe in the principle of the thing itself. After all, red states tend to be poorer on average than blue states, but they would never claim that people in red states are worse than people in blue states.

  • fatcyst||

    1. Trump is the best thing that has happened to this country in a long time.
    2. The AVERAGE IQ of these people is around ~70 (hint: its basically down syndrome)

  • Tony||

    3. Roy Moore for Senate! Alabama--not a shithole.

  • Eric||

    "The AVERAGE IQ of these people is around ~70 (hint: its basically down syndrome)"

    This is true, but misleading. You cannot apply a modern IQ test to someone from an agrarian society. The same exact bias exists when measuring liberal vs conservative IQs.

  • fatcyst||

    What makes you think then, that someone from an agrarian society can succeed in a western society? (Obviously there are outliers)

  • Eric||

    Not all of us start out as millionaires. Someone needs to polish our monocles.

  • fatcyst||

    The real answer is that generally they dont and they end up in generally poverty and wellfare. Might they be better off back with their own, in their own country?

  • fatcyst||

    Generational poverty*

  • Eric||

    I think that the market does a pretty good job of determining our demand for menial labor. I like my produce inexpensive. And if a Guatemalan is willing to pick my lettuce in the San Juaquin Valley for much less than a US citizen would do it, then that is a win/win for all involved.

  • fatcyst||

    Won't happen. unless you're talking about illegals and tax evasion.

  • MikeP2||

    Not when for every Guatemalan picking lettuce, there are two other here illegally contributing shite and consuming public resources funded on the backs on citizens taxes of which the one Guatemalan working his arse off isnt even paying.

    So no, your unicorn fart hypothetical is irrelevant.

  • You're Kidding||

    Except that the crusaders for the laborers in the San Joaquin Valley are doing everything they can to provide "a living wage" for them. Which means market distortion and your produce will no longer be inexpensive nor maybe even available.

    The parallels between this kind of thinking and the dystopian world of Atlas Shrugged are strong.

  • Mark22||

    It's a win for you and for the agribusiness, not for the people who are forced to subsidize for those low skill Guatemalans.

    In different words, you're using low skill immigration to hide massive crony capitalism and subsidies.

  • Ecoli||

    How did those shithole countries become shitholes? Why are they still shitholes?

  • Eric||

    European imperialism had a huge part to play in much of Africa and the Middle East's current state of affairs.

  • Eric||

    You really are a simpleton, aren't you. Care to argue my point?

  • Eric||

    I'll do it for you since you're probably just going to fling poo.

    The Ottoman Empire was a major civilization on par with much of Europe up until it was defeated along with the other Central Powers in WWI. It's member states were most of what comprises the middle east today. After it's defeat, it was partitioned by the French and English into the hodgepodge of countries (not nations) we see today.
    When you erect national borders without concern for ethnic/tribal/cultural differences, and install corrupt strongmen to lord over these disparate peoples, you generally get bad results. And we can see that playing out in the ME.
    The same thing happened in Africa, where the major European powers subjugated most of the continent and stole any wealth the people had.

    These are facts, not opinions. You can make a valid argument that most of these countries have had about a century to put things right. Which I'm sure if you give them time, many will. Hell, it took almost millennium for Western Civilization to navigate out of the dark ages.

  • Eric||

    It took the south about 100 years to reintegrate with the rest of the US after the civil war. And that's with enormous amounts of support. People (white, black and brown) don't like being subjugated by those more powerful than them. They resist changes that are forced upon them and they cling to their beliefs. I'd think a cultural conservative like yourself would have more empathy.

  • fatcyst||

    I thought the presidents alleged comments were about Africa and Haiti? Anywho, I would also argue they were not subjugated in Africa (read history of Rhodesia, voting rights, education opportunities). Also a lot of these lands were barren when settled.

    2nd wealth was not stolen. Africans were standing directly on top of it and had no idea what to do with it thus they never possessed it. Much of Africa does not the The Wheel to this day.

  • JoeBlow123||

    How do you install borders anywhere across the globe in places that are tribal? Some of what you say is true but if even the best borders were drawn to try and respect tribal boundaries and call them a nation, it wouldn't have mattered. Nationalism was not a thing, there were no "peoples" only small tribal groupings.

    It took Europeans decades of warfare for the Europeans to slowly create nation states then it took Napoleon to blow up the old kingdoms and aristocratic pretentions, to say nothing of the humble burgermeisters and bourgeoise and merchants that blew open the door towards education. Africa, Asia, the Middle Eastern societies by and large did not have that besides Japan and China and the Mughals and Ottomans. Big surprise some of the only functioning nation states to emerge from the morass were Japan, China, Turkey, and India.

    To end it all, imperialism was bad but let's not pretend places across the globe were tending towards prosperity before the the big bad Europeans showed up. It's disingenuous. If Europeans never discovered these places they would have very likely been the same place now they were a millennia ago, tribal.

  • Eric||

    "If Europeans never discovered these places they would have very likely been the same place now they were a millennia ago, tribal."

    You may be right. But they would be in a general state of equilibrium. European colonialism stirred the pot and it will take time for the ingredients to come to rest.

  • JoeBlow123||

    "You may be right. But they would be in a general state of equilibrium. European colonialism stirred the pot and it will take time for the ingredients to come to rest."

    I think that is fair. There were lots of unintended consequences (many intentional too) from imperialism and colonialism and it will probably take these places a lot of blood and time to slowly establish their nations. Won't be an easy task for many people.

    We indeed are lucky in the West.

  • JFree||

    The main problem with Africa is that the borders were deliberately drawn to divide and conquer and to encourage corruption and dependence on the outsider master race. To split ethnicities that had histories of working together - and unite ethnicities that had histories of fighting. And those are now the UN-sanctioned borders with no way of fixing them except for an ethnic cleansing war. Outside maybe the Balkans, Europe has never had such deliberately fucked up borders.

    Maybe Africa will be able to peaceably figure out how to split up into hundreds of countries and then recombine into more sustainable nations. But no one else has ever done that.

    Or maybe they'll get some Charlemagne/Napoleon/Hitler to run roughshod over the entire continent and then split apart into natural entities afterward. But that's hardly gonna be peaceful.

  • JoeBlow123||

    When they were made "nations" it would have mattered close to zero how the borders were drawn. They had no conception of nationalism. It is faulty reasoning to assume if some perfect borders were drawn and Europeans didn't interfere things would be rosy.

    There was no lasting kingdoms or political structures, no investiture conflict, no 30 Years War, no feudalism, no wars of religion, no Peace of Westphalia. They were tribal. They would not magically morph into functioning states and peoples if makes on a map somehow conformed to some magic tribal/ethnic formula.

  • You're Kidding||

    It might be a first step towards solving the human population problem. :-)

  • fatcyst||

    I will argue it: Imperialism gave them their only taste of a western society. The people there are too primitive and stupid to be able to perform the upkeep needed to maintain the gifts from the Europeans. And don't get me started on actually inventing and building things from scratch. There has been none of it. Lastly, politicians are always corrupt but black politicians/despots are at a way higher rate leading to no success and squandering of any "aid" given to them.

  • Eric||

    Your argument assumes that imperialism was a "gift" to the savages, no?

    Please describe these gifts? Would it be the unelected dictators installed as colonial puppets with the mandate to keep the resources flowing north? Would it be apartheid in South Africa? The slave trade in Western Africa? Or simply the genocide? Can you explain why the Native Americans haven't done more with their "gifts"? Or are they also ungrateful savages that have squandered their vast opportunities bequeathed to them?

  • fatcyst||

    You're jumping all over with your questions but Ill try to touch on some:

    1. Aparthied was a reaction to the violence and unrest that was growing at the time and it lasted 70 years. SA was a colony for hundreds.
    2. I didn't mention slavery but I dont think the settlers were vastly responsible for the slave trade, perhaps the early ones but its so long ago its really not relevant.
    3. The only genocide i can think of is of is against whites and also blacks that allied with whites during the revolutions.
    4. The settlers created homes, jobs, wealth, education, trades, mining industry, roads, railroads, airports, etc... Look at Johannesburg today, there are derelict skyscrapers because 'ungrateful savages that have squandered their vast opportunities bequeathed to them'.

  • JFree||

    fatcyst - You are exactly the person Mark Twain was referencing when he said It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

  • MikeP2||

    Rule of law. It wasnt that much resource relative to the total available, and it left much behind and the infrstructure to extract and process it. Apartheid is gone, how many decades until that is not an excuse?. Slave trade is no more, how many centuries until that is not an excuse? Which genocide do you mean....few were intiated by imperials, but rather intertribe. Some Native americans have done quite well...others wallow in victimhood. Yes, in general.

  • Tony||

    Does constantly whining about immigrants and brown people terking er jerbs etc., not count as wallowing in victimhood?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Tony knows all about victimhood and hoods.

    The Democrats formed the KKK and loved them some white hoods. They victimized blacks and then when that didn't work anymore, the Democrats convinced generations of blacks that getting government money was better than entrepreneurial spirit, working hard, and owning property.

  • You're Kidding||

    Should have stuck with 40 acres and a mule. They'd be so much better off as a group today.

  • Ecoli||

    Eric, how do you explain the world dominance by England? How many times was England invaded and conquered by savages such as the Vikings, the Romans, etc? Even after all the imperialism, the English went on to have an empire where the sun never set.

    Surely, the English should be worse off than Haitians, shouldn't they?

  • JFree||

    The last time England was invaded (more than just some minor coastal raid) was 1066. The last serious attempt was 1588 (which was actually prevented more by the Dutch and the weather than the English). And the reality is that their empire didn't really begin until William of Orange was able to combine the English fleet (#3) and Dutch fleets (#1) during his reign - and that fleet remained English afterwards (so the Dutch declined). So they were able to more than double the size of their navy - without taxes. Charles I was beheaded mainly because he had to ask Parliament to raise taxes for a navy. Sometimes empires just fall into your lap. That's all more than 600 years after the last invasion.

    The last time Haiti was invaded (and occupied) was 1915-1934 by the US.

  • Radioactive||

    cause people poop in holes?

  • chemjeff||

    You should read up a little bit on the history of Haiti. It is rather revealing, and quite sad.

    To put it into perspective, imagine if our revolution had gone like this:
    The colonists had to fight BOTH the British AND the French in order to liberate themselves.
    Then when peace finally came, the British & French imposed harsh terms, forcing the new nation to pay them back for all of the assets that they "stole" from their former colonial masters, under threat of blockade of their ports. And that the debt was so punitive it took 150 years to finally pay it all off. Oh and to earn the money to pay off this enormous debt, the new nation didn't have an entire continent's worth of resources to exploit, only half an island's worth.
    Then, whenever the country seemed to be finally getting on its feet, the military would get uppity and seize power, in an endless series of military coups.
    Finally, their big brother nation from the north was always meddling in their affairs, even going so far at one point as to invade the country and run it for them for a long period of time.
    And then this big brother country has the gall to lecture them "Well why are you such a shithole country? Huh? Why aren't you as prosperous as we are? It's because you're terrible people!"

  • fatcyst||

    No its because they're low IQ and genocided the colonists.

  • Paloma||

    People who love to use IQ as an argument never have high ones.

  • fatcyst||

    You have contributed nothing.

  • Tony||

    Your contributions have made the entire universe dumber. Jump in a black hole.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Tony, you have been neck deep in a socialist black hole for some time now.

    Let go.

  • Mark22||

    Your ad hominem certainly isn't an argument.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Didn't the Haitians vote in a tyrant in 1957?

  • You're Kidding||

    Are you talking about Haiti or, post WWI Germany?

  • Agnes||

    Love the 'but our ancestors were immigrants' ideology.

    Yah....but looked how much THEY progressed in 150 years and look at all of the countries which stayed in relatively the same living conditions. And the reason why any of their living conditions even got remotely better was mostly from Europeans / Americans going to those countries bringing innovation.

    Africa and the middle east is literally where the beginning of civilization started, yet why are they the furthest behind?

  • fatcyst||

    I wouldnt lump in the middle east in with the other shitholes. If you look at the old pictures from the 60s-70s, some places were pretty advanced and classy. Their issue is mostly islam.

  • Paloma||

    Islam was advanced over European civilization during the Middle Ages when the dominant philosophy was Platonism/Augustinian in Europe, but Aristotelian in Muslim countries. This was turned on its head at the dawn of the Renaissance when the Aristotelian philosopher Averroes was exiled and out of favor and Islam itself became dominated by the backward thinking skepticism of Al Zarkawi. Meanwhile in Europe, Thomas Aquinas revived Aristotle's teachings that became the foundation of the Renaissance and later the Enlightenment.

  • JoeBlow123||

    This argument has always been rather interesting. Not arguing who was richer or more powerful militarily at that time, but this argument is goofy. It has always looked to me like "Ohh, ohh we are cool too, look at what we did!"

    Who cares really? My ancestors were cooler than your ancestors?

  • Paloma||

    Nothing to do with ancestors and everything to do with the philosophy that undergoes the culture of any given people. Not their genetics, not their IQ, not even their religion itself. Not even whether they are lazy or work hard.

  • You're Kidding||

    Because all the smart folks left?

  • DiegoF||

    The whole point of America is that it doesn't matter where you come from.

    Apparently Gillespie has not spent a lot of time socializing with the black community.

  • shawn_dude||

    The President's #1 job is chief diplomat. He's our connection to the rest of the world. Being diplomatic is a core job requirement. Calling other countries "shitholes" or saying they're full of "rapists" is pretty much total failure at his job.

    I don't see any reason to analyze whether he's right or not, or in what contexts his shitty comments make sense. It's his job to be diplomatic not brutally honest (assuming you think he's correct, I don't.)

    Remember when the big diplomatic scandal was George H W Bush vomiting on a foreign dignitary at the home of the Japanese Prime Minister? Heh. Those were the good 'ol days.

  • fatcyst||

    We have enough problems domestically. I could give fuck all about the rest of the world.

  • Paloma||

    We have enough problems in my neighborhood. I could give fuck all about the rest of the country.

  • fatcyst||

    I wish more people thought like this (especially the feds)

  • MikeP2||

    So you chose to ignore the fact that these 'comments' stem from second hand reports of what was said in a closed door meeting?

    Shouldnt we all prefer politicians who speak bluntly and honestly in private?

  • Deflator Mouse||

    This was a meeting with senators and aides from both parties. Shithole is not a word one uses in a professional setting, regardless of whether it was in public.

    That said, I agree there is no evidence that he really said that word.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    "The President's #1 job is chief diplomat."

    NO its not.

    Article I describes how to become president.
    Article II, Section 2 starts with this clause:
    The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states....

    Not that any listing order means anything.

  • Mark22||

    You'd have a point if Trump had made such comments in public. A hostile leak that purports that he said something like this is not Trump's fault.

    Diplomacy also doesn't necessarily mean being nice. As an immigrant who hates the country I came from, the more foreign leaders tell the politicians who made my life miserable there what an awful place it is and what rotten leaders they are, the better.

  • JFree||

    Hey - one guy's vomit on a foreign dignitary is another's daily diarrhea on twitter.

  • CE||

    The whole point of America is that it doesn't matter where you come from. It matters what you do when you're here.

    Amen.

  • Radioactive||

    like fuck things up for the rest of us?

  • Tony||

    Why do you freedom people give a shit what other people do? Did you think freedom came with absolutely no inconvenience to you?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Slavers vote to end my freedom and actively try and take my freedom away.

    I am not going to let that happen without a fight.

  • Tony||

    Ah, so freedom for you, just not anybody else. That makes this whole libertarian business make a lot more sense.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    All my fellow Americans get that freedom too because my ancestors fought for American Independence.

    Under Tony's calling, the socialist rule and everyone is enslaved, including Tony. He's just too dumb to realize lefties eventually go after their own.

  • You're Kidding||

    Your right to swing your fist freely through the air ends where my nose begins.

    "There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke

    Freedom for all Tony as long as it doesn't take away that of another.

  • JoeBlow123||

    Can someone please explain to me the benefit barely educated individuals who can speak almost unintelligible English will have in America, what benefit they provide to an economy that is looking for individuals skilled in the STEM fields? We don't exactly have an economy similar to what we had in the 1800s where nothing was needed but a strong back and good health.

  • Kivlor||

    You're being a bigot. No one can explain anything to you because you're racist and a Nazi and evil. It's a tragedy that you exist in this great country and are free to spread your hate. /sarc

  • Kivlor||

    But honestly, there's nothing to explain. The idea is that we will bring in a bunch of (generally) low IQ people to cheapen the cost of menial tasks in an ever-automated labor market. And when those people can't get work in their old jobs they'll be blamed for not retraining, even if they're not smart enough to retrain. And so we'll blame them for being on welfare when they can't be expected to do much else.

    Those people will be given the vote, and will vote for more gibsmedat and demand more people from their homeland be let in. People will say "we need moar immigrants to make labor less expensive and cheapen the cost of living" even as it actually increases taxation, property prices, cost of living, and government welfare. As more are brought in, the odds of reducing the expansion of government will become impossible to overcome.

    Finally, the violence will hit unbelievable highs as the hatred for successful white people intensifies. Whites will be blamed for everything, becoming the Goldstein of our people. Demands for reparations from whites will result in the election of a tyrant who will confiscate white lands to gift to non-whites, and turn a blind eye as the brownies go out into the country to bring about #OneSetterOneBullet.

  • fatcyst||

    Its all really sad

  • Tony||

    Iron Law Whatever the Fuck: you aren't free unless you're free to be wrong.*

    *Unless you're brown and/or an immigrant, in which case I think I get to tell you exactly where and how you should live.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Tony is sad. A sad sack in fact.

  • Mark22||

    The idea is that we will bring in a bunch of (generally) low IQ people to cheapen the cost of menial tasks in an ever-automated labor market.

    Agribusinesses benefit greatly from this: they get cheap labor, and the tax payer bears the cost of providing the social services and government support for that cheap labor.

    Leftists point this out themselves when they argue that the tax payer subsidizes Walmart through the welfare state. Oddly enough, their policy response to this problem is to increase the subsidies and increase the number of low skill workers, thereby making the problem worse.

  • You're Kidding||

    You must live in the harbinger of things to come.......California.

  • JeremyR||

    The problem is they keep voting for the same policies that made their home countries so terrible

  • Tony||

    Maybe in addition to restricting their freedom of movement, we should take away their right to vote.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There is no freedom of movement into the USA.

    There is a right to vote once you are an American citizen.

  • Paloma||

    Do immigrants even vote? We have a hard enough time getting citizens to vote, especially young people.

  • Deflator Mouse||

    Of course they vote. Illegally, or as the leftists would say, undocumentedly.

  • Mark22||

    I'm an immigrant. I'm naturalized now. I vote. I used to be a registered Democrat, now an independent.

  • MikeP2||

    Since we have no transcript, or first hand report of what was said this whole thing is a fiasco.
    Your open border, unicorn dreams aside, Nick, a perfectly accurate presidential comment would be...

    "We want to encourage the kind of immigrants who support societal norms and civil practices that produce societies like Norway, not what turned Haiti or Nigeria into the shitholes they are. We want immigrants who want the best for themselves, not wallow in the social graces of others. How we do that is the core question or the day." One could hope thats what was said.

    Your cherry picked factoids about immigrant benefits, job creation, etc is insulting. It is inarguable that there are better and worse classes of immigrants. Its not skin color or continent, but culture. Only ignorant progs believe all cultures are equal.

  • gormadoc||

    You heard it here first, folks! MikeP2 wants heavy taxation, extreme government involvement in labor contracts, and universal healthcare, just like they want in Norway.

  • Paloma||

    German immigrants were the ones who brought the idiot prog ideas here in the first place.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Prog ideas have been around a long time before the USA was founded.

    Progressives reject social Darwinism, so you can find this type of save the World through government throughout recorded time. The Progressives just like to think their idea was original and call their hayday The Progressive Era 1890-1920.

    The Bible has a lot of passages that reject hedonism and instead say to care for your fellow man.

  • Mark22||

    Prog ideas have been around a long time before the USA was founded.

    Socialism has been around longer, but progressivism and neo-Marxism really became big in the 20th century, and Germany is in large part responsible.

    Progressives reject social Darwinism

    Progressives have been primary proponents of social Darwinism, they simply draw different policy conclusions from it than "laissez faire". Progressives value humans with some traits more than others, and that's why they promoted eugenics and segregation, for example.

    It's conservatives and Christians who have been rejecting social Darwinism, believing that people have the same worth as human beings regardless of their differences.

  • zombietimeshare||

    If the countries in question are so wonderful why are those living there fleeing en masse, and resisting attempts to send them home?

    If the countries in question are not, or are no longer, holes, great, send the refugees back to enjoy life in their incredible countries.

  • sparkstable||

    Watch Poverty Inc. It explains clearly that places like Haiti and Africa today are not operating in a vacuum. Europe colonized them and instilled dictators. Resources were extracted and sent elsewhere with little to no economic return to the people of these places. To deny this happened is ridiculous.

    But the argument now is... But that was then. Why are they bad NOW? And many conclude it must be something about them as people. Yet, they are not able to operate equally in a global economy. This retards their economic advancement, entrenches corrupt political and business leaders as the expense of the masses, warps their natural market signals, etc. How can you look at Haiti and say, "Yeah... we have been heavily involved in trying to fix your poverty instead of letting you develop out of it. And yeah, we failed at that yet keep doing it. But why are YOU poor?"

    What the hell kind of logic is that? It IS our fault in part, even unintentionally, that they are poor. We help out of a good heart but hurt out of ignorance then blame them for failing at something we never let them try and do.

  • Mark22||

    Europe colonized them and instilled dictators.

    Europe installed administrators, not dictators, and those countries arguably did better as colonies than as autonomous nations. The dictators arose in those countries after they achieved independence from their European colonial masters.

    Resources were extracted and sent elsewhere with little to no economic return to the people of these places.

    Resource wealth is one predictor of poverty: countries rich in resources tend not to develop human resources.

    Yet, they are not able to operate equally in a global economy.

    Sure they are: they can negotiate trade deals like everybody else. Countries like Switzerland or Singapore aren't handed convenient trade deals on a silver platter, they need to work for them. Of course, if a country doesn't have anything to offer, people aren't interested in making deals with them.

    It IS our fault in part, even unintentionally, that they are poor.

    No, it is not our fault. It is nobody's fault, it's the way the world works. There is a wide variety of human abilities, and that's reflected in a large degree of inequality both at the individual and national levels. The West has been going out of its way to try to alleviate some of that inequality, but there are limits to what can be done.

  • TommyInIdaho||

    My people fled Tsarist Lithuania to escape the pogroms. Dreck-hole? You bet. As for welfare, the lack thereof engendered private charities and mutual aid societies where people took care of others and themselves. One of the provisions of PPACA stopped the formation of new mutual aids, a direct attack on free association to bolster up insurance companies.

  • Mark22||

    The PPACA was a crony capitalist scheme to benefit insurance companies, medical providers, and drug companies. So, of course, it was going to try to kill competition and keep prices high: that was its purpose.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Liked this rant Nick. Minimal TDS and lot's of relevant history making your case. To your many excellent points I would add that anti immigrant hysteria also fueled the War On Drugs, which transformed a country that once valued liberty into a police state.

  • Ishmael||

    Of course! Just what you do here!

    Like shoot Kate!

    Or 'Rape, Murder, Control!', like MS-13!

    Or have 50+ ISIS per 'refugee status' check flown out like Somalis!

    Or try to blow up The Mall of America, like Somalis!

    Or gut shoot white women, after turning off the Police cameras, like "Officer" Noor in Minneapolis, for calling in a rape (Somalia Sharia 'Justice'!) to Minneapolis Police!

    Or run over students and take axes & machetes to them at The Ohio State University, if you're Somali!

    All under cover of Sen. Al Franken (Playmate Sleep Assaulter) AND Reason's Nick Gillespie!

    And, wait! These are just a few highlights that this TOTALLY DISABLED NAVY VET THAT HAS HAD TO LIVE WITH, AFTER HAVING SEEN -FUCKING SEEN!!! - THE SHITHOLE CALLED "SOMALIA OFF THE PORT BOW WHILE DEPLOYING FOR COMBAT: AGAINST ISLAMIC TERRORISTS, NO LESS!!

    WOW! What an UnReasonable Article given past 20+ years of LAWLESS, ILLEGAL BS from South of US Border; North of US Border; ALL of Africa, etc!!!

    How about caring about US and it's Natural Born Citizenry??

  • buybuydandavis||

    "How about caring about US and it's Natural Born Citizenry??"

    Horror! That's civic nationalism!

    Government of, by, and for the people is *totally* racist. Even if it's about the citizens regardless of race. Because Nazis.

  • XM||

    When Trump is referring to "----hole" countries, he's imagining nations wrecked by anarchy and violence, like Africa or Syria, and (probably) not generic third world nations like Vietnam or India. His followup comment about bringing more people from Norway and Japan is more about bringing people from more stable, developed nations. He was no doubt playing the safety and security man during the DACA discussion.

    I've seen people here use some rather colorful language to describe places like Detroit, Chicago, Mississippi, etc. In fact I'm pretty sure the term "----hole" was used. That doesn't prove that they're racists, no more than Trump flying off the handle means he's some stealth Klan member. I was a bit unnerved by the "take them out" comment, but Tapper says that was referring the taking them out of DACA deals. Of course this is conduct unbecoming of POTUS, and an apology is in order.

    It's intellectually honest to say "they're from ----hole countries, that's why we should protect them here". Because it is fundamentally TRUE. But immigration is a identity politic game for the left. So even if Trump said something like "These poor people have fled ----hole nations" they'll immediately perceive racist dog whistle.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "The whole point of America is that it doesn't matter where you come from. It matters what you do when you're here."

    And A has *nothing* at all to do with B.

    Because magic dirt.

    In *reality land*, immigrants favor bigger government than Americans, and naturally vote accordingly. Import more and more big government voters, get bigger and bigger government. Duh. Simply not rocket science.

    Reason should stop the bullshit and just admit they are deontolgists and not consequentialists. They are perfectly willing to see America become a big government shithole, because muh principles. Borders are wrong, m'kay?

  • Martiandawn||

    If you import a million people a year from failed nation-states that are plagued by internecine violence, corrupt governments, crippling poverty, and backward technology, making no effort to filter out unskilled and uneducated people who can contribute almost nothing to a modern economy, you only succeed in turning this country into a shithole.

  • ArLyne Diamond, Ph.D.||

    Nick, you are great! Of course people come here because we promise a better life than the one they are escaping. I think Trump is his own worst enemy - he speaks like what my parents would have called "a truck driver." (No offense to truck drivers.) His comments are so crude that I actually think he is not prejudiced against any particular group of people, but like other New Yorkers I have known, has something nasty to say about every group. I grew up hearing phrases like "all butchers put their fingers on the scale" and "all cops take graft."

    Although it is difficult, let's not confuse his stupid and crude remarks from his actual behavior.

  • Mark22||

    Of course people come here because we promise a better life than the one they are escaping.

    And instead of one-sided promises like that, we should make this a fair deal that's beneficial to both sides: "we give you a better life than where you come from, and in return, you make a better economic contribution to the US than the average American".

  • josh||

    The same people who denounce his comments as racist will, in the next breath, tell us about how he's also racist for being tough on the poor immigrants who escaped truly horrible circumstances and want nothing more than a better life in America.

  • Mark22||

    But he and all the nativists are wrong in thinking that America, this great, bruising, hulk of a nation, would be better off with fewer immigrants from fewer shitholes

    The US would be better off adopting an immigration system like all other wealthy nations have: one based on skill, high income potential, education, and cultural compatibility.

    That is, given an annual immigration quota of around 500k immigrants, we should select the most qualified and best educated immigrants; the US already has enough stupid, uneducated people, we don't need more of those.

  • Pyrrho21C||

    Love the article. But we bohunks, and polacks too, were lumped in with the wops and micks as bomb-throwing anarchist mackerel-snappers. And it was settled science (look up Henry Goddard) that our ancestors were mostly imbeciles or morons at best, which fact could be ascertained simply by looking at them as they straggled, dazed, out of steerage into the light of the New World.

  • AD-RtR/OS!||

    But, it should matter that you come here legally.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    The point about LA's Chinatown is well taken. In fact there remain a network of tunnels beneath the streets that were constructed as routes to escape from the vigilantes.

    That said, Gillespie must take account of the fact that current immigration law favors technically-skilled workers from countries like India and Pakistan, not the "wretched refuse" from Haiti or Somalia. Yes, we need people who can be productive in our country, but the sad reality today is that most will be unemployable in any but the most menial jobs. One feature of any immigration overhaul should be the requirement that each have a job offer in place, or be enrolled in an appropriate technical school to learn a marketable trade.

  • Africanis||

    I often wonder if anyone here could defend all their private comments. Yeah think about that.

  • Ned Netterville||

    I'd open the borders for all comers. If there was no welfare whatsoever, including no public schools nor free emergency care or anything else, many would still come, and much of what we think of a social welfare services would be provided by private Americans who saw their self-interest in helping others.

  • plusafdotcom||

    Well, imnsho, Nick could have stopped after the first paragraph.
    Second, when someone blathers "Then there's the argument that runs along the "but your grandparents and parents came from Europe and a tradition of limited government and soap and Winston Churchill and didn't vote Democrat..." ", or some equally stupid statement, the best reply is, "Well WhyTF did they LEAVE There if it wasn't for the reason that they though they were going Somewhere BETTER... i.e., a "Less-Shithole-ey Place"?

  • AZ Gunowner||

    Well, we've had quite a number of examples of "what people do when they get here".

    Reducing the number that get to come here will save some lives.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    Well, we've had quite a number of examples of "what people do when they get here".

    Reducing the number that get to come here will save some lives.

  • vek||

    I ain't readin' all the posts... But the bottom line question is this: Do we want a nation that has a higher per capita income, higher standard of living, and a larger middle class, or a nation that is more pyramid shaped in income distribution, lower per capita income, and a smaller middle class?

    Because if you want the higher per capita income and a larger middle class, then you can't import uneducated immigrants into a post industrial economy. Times change, and needs change. A strong back and a good work ethic is not enough to make one much of a useful economic unit in 21st century America.

    Dalmia's articles showing the average income of Indian Americans is the exact point people are trying to make. I'm fine with doctors and engineers coming here, because they will not be a drag on the economy... But unless we're going to bring back sweatshop manufacturing to US shores we can't have a never ending flood of people with low/no education. How this obvious market supply/demand curve calculation manages to escape so called libertarians like Gillespie is fucking unbelievable.

  • AD-RtR/OS!||

    Correct. It shouldn't matter where you come from; but it certainly should matter what you did/were when you were there.
    We don't need to be importing bank robbers, wife beaters, Ponzi Schemers, or anyone with a criminal history of any kind; just as we would not allow those with contagious diseases entry.

  • randall||

    Don't American schools produce enough unskilled workers without adding more unskilled workers?

  • Michaeld||

    In the past, assimilation was expected and happened. Immigrants were proud to be Americans. Now not so much in many cases. In the past there was plenty of work for low skilled workers. Now and in the future not so much. We have every right to protect our workers and look more toward merit for acceptance in to the country.

  • Liberty Lover||

    The real problem, no matter what country the immigrants come from, is how to you filter out the "shitheads" from the desirable immigrants?

  • vek||

    You can't... But you can at least verify they'll have good job prospects and be decent taxpayers. Beyond that I am quite positive that any immigrants we take in, on average, will only make this country tilt further left. This includes Europeans who completely don't "get" most of our constitutional freedoms, because they don't have them back home. AND in the case of some, like Muslims, they bring other issues as well.

    That's why I'm in favor of less, but higher education, immigration. Honestly I'd probably rather have the economic consequences of ZERO immigration personally considering the political consequences, but high skilled people is a reasonable compromise.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online