Apples To Oranges
May 21st, 2007 by GoldFalcon
The War on Guns: Guest Editorial: Rock Em
I’m gonna sum up the above linked post for you and then descend into caustic commentary.
Summation: The American Way of Life is being threatened by illegal immigration and the proper response to inattentive politicians is pointless vandalism. The reason this would be a proper and possibly effective response is because chunking rocks through windows worked for the Sons of Liberty two and a half centuries ago.
Commentary:
OK, let’s delve into this, shall we? Leaving aside the assertion that illegal immigration is a threat to our very lives and would somehow trigger ethnic cleansing on a scale that would dwarf the events in the former Yugoslavia, what –precisely– would tossing bricks through windows accomplish? Mike Vanderboegh, author of the guest editorial, seems to believe that because it worked for Samuel Adams it would have some practical impact today –even while claiming that the only reason it did work for the Sons of Liberty was due to the expense of glass in Colonial America.
Well lets look at that. Did the Sons of Liberty contribute substantially to our freedom? I would argue no. If vandalism could have changed the course of things there would have been no need for that bloody conflict known as The Revolution, now would there? What their activities did do was prompt the British to increase the troop presence in the Colonies. The men at Lexington and Concord weren’t having a rockfight, they were involved in an all out shooting war.
The Sons of Liberty were terrorists. They attempted to use fear and intimidation against the civilian population in order to enforce a trade embargo. And it didn’t work. Armed revolution did.
And, hey, as long as we are dusting off old mothballs, why stop at the bricks? The Sons of Liberty also used to drag merchants out into the square and then tar, feather, and beat them. Perhaps this is the approach we need to illegal immigration, eh?
But let’s for a moment, go back to my original question: what would it accomplish in today’s world? If every single local and national office that housed a Republican or Democrat politician woke up to find a rust-red Nev-R-Bust™ sitting on top of the Xerox machine amid a pile of busted glass it would not shift policy a single inch. Police and glaziers would be called, arrests would be made, CNN would run the story and that would be it. 72 hours and most of America wouldn’t even remember that it happened. This is not eighteenth-century Massachusetts or Virginia and the dispersion of the populace guarantees that modern Americans would feel no personal connection to the act and, thus, it would be forgotten.
But why should this even be considered? Is illegal immigration poised to destroy us as Mr. Vanderboegh claims? Do we face the threat of oppression and denial of basic human freedoms as did Samuel Adams? Do the Mexican immigrants hold in their asparagus stained hands the keys to our destruction? Certainly not. There is not one charge leveled against the illegal Mexican immigrant that was not leveled against the European immigrants of the past, except one: now it’s illegal.
Drain on the system? Check.
Refusal to assimilate? Check.
Taking jobs from Americans? Check.
Bringing criminal cultures with them? Check.
Sending money back to the homeland? Check.
All of these were leveled at the great waves of Chinese, Irish, Italian, Jewish, Polish, and Russian immigrants. Get that straight in your head. Every single charge was made against every group. Hell, the argument could be made that many of them still refuse to assimilate. Little Italy? Chinatown? The Diamond District? Half the fucking civil servants in Boston? These ethnic enclaves serve as incubators for Americans, not threats to our way of life.
What’s the worst case scenario? Mexican immigrants become the majority? What would happen then? Well, I can tell you. You see, for the past five years I’ve lived in a town in Washington State that is fully sixty percent Hispanic, most of them immigrants, many of them illegal. Certainly there were differences (most of the signs were in Spanish for instance –many dispensed with English all together), but there was nothing earth-shattering. It didn’t turn into little Tijuana on Cinco de Mayo; there weren’t shootouts in the streets; no kidnapping for ransom; no South American Drug Lords working me over like I was an extra in Three Amigos, no roving bands of Mariachi’s with half of the Springfield Armory in their guitar cases.
Life was normal. American even. The kids watch Barney and Dragon Tales and learn English in the schools, then they go on to college and get packed full of the same stuff that other American kids get packed full of and by the third generation they are as American as somebody born in Lincoln’s Log Cabin.
Certainly nothing worth the hyperbole “the devil will walk abroad and our children’s, children’s children will curse us.”
As far as politicians spitting on the Constitution in regards to this issue. I’ve checked my handy-dandy desktop copy of the Constitution and I can’t see a single bloody reference to immigration anywhere. So perhaps what Mr. Vanderboegh takes umbrage with is politicians ignoring the will of the people? OK, I can see that, but the responsibility of citizens then is to change the politicians, not to become ineffective criminals.
“America is at that awkward stage. It’s too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.”
- Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do ‘Til the Revolution
Folks,
I am taken to task by Goldfinger in what he alleges to be a “caustic commentary” on his blog. Let us take his charges ad seriatim and see if we can achieve some light with the heat.
Mike Vanderboegh
Apples To Oranges
May 21st, 2007 by GoldFalcon
The War on Guns: Guest Editorial: Rock Em
I’m gonna sum up the above linked post for you and then descend into caustic commentary.
Summation: The American Way of Life is being threatened by illegal immigration and the proper response to inattentive politicians is pointless vandalism.
MBV: No, the proposed vandalism is about as pointed as it can be. It takes political dissatisfaction and applies it to the cause of that dissatisfaction.
Goldfinger: The reason this would be a proper and possibly effective response is because chunking rocks through windows worked for the Sons of Liberty two and a half centuries ago.
MBV: Merely pointing out that vandalism in liberty’s cause is as American as apple pie.
Goldfinger Commentary:
OK, let’s delve into this, shall we? Leaving aside the assertion that illegal immigration is a threat to our very lives and would somehow trigger ethnic cleansing on a scale that would dwarf the events in the former Yugoslavia, what –precisely– would tossing bricks through windows accomplish?
MBV: But you can’t leave that aside. It is perfectly a predictable result of the resentments, emotions and racist agitation exploiting those resentments and emotions that can be seen in the recent rise of recruiting on the part of the neoNazis and Ku Klux Klan. Have you paid attention to the racial warfare that is already a fact of life between black and brown in LA?
Goldfinger: Mike Vanderboegh, author of the guest editorial, seems to believe that because it worked for Samuel Adams it would have some practical impact today –even while claiming that the only reason it did work for the Sons of Liberty was due to the expense of glass in Colonial America.
MBV: Hardly, and I thought I was the one supposedly guilty of straw man arguments.
Goldfinger: Well lets look at that. Did the Sons of Liberty contribute substantially to our freedom? I would argue no. If vandalism could have changed the course of things there would have been no need for that bloody conflict known as The Revolution, now would there? What their activities did do was prompt the British to increase the troop presence in the Colonies. The men at Lexington and Concord weren’t having a rockfight, they were involved in an all out shooting war.
The Sons of Liberty were terrorists. They attempted to use fear and intimidation against the civilian population in order to enforce a trade embargo. And it didn’t work. Armed revolution did.
MBV: Silly man. One would not have happened without the other. What the Sons of Liberty did, at Samuel Adams’ expert direction, was to a.) demonstrate to all that the people preserved the “spirit of resistance” (as Jefferson called it) to tyranny and b.) laid the groundwork for Lexington and Concord by ensuring, among other things, that the militia organizations were in the hands of the revolutionists.
Goldfinger: And, hey, as long as we are dusting off old mothballs, why stop at the bricks? The Sons of Liberty also used to drag merchants out into the square and then tar, feather, and beat them. Perhaps this is the approach we need to illegal immigration, eh?
MBV: Now, there’s an idea. But in the modern context a bad one. Means and methods, my boy, means and methods. No matter how offended by events, conservative/libertarians are not going to gather into mobs. The more daring will, however, risk a bit of guerrilla vandalism against property in a good cause. And then there’s the audience to consider. The good guys (which is us) are only targeting property not people, thus showing our restraint (again, from history: the few times the Boston mob got out of hand cost Sam Adams’ cause points in popular opinion).
Goldfinger: But let’s for a moment, go back to my original question: what would it accomplish in today’s world? If every single local and national office that housed a Republican or Democrat politician woke up to find a rust-red Nev-R-Bust™ sitting on top of the Xerox machine amid a pile of busted glass it would not shift policy a single inch. Police and glaziers would be called, arrests would be made, CNN would run the story and that would be it. 72 hours and most of America wouldn’t even remember that it happened. This is not eighteenth-century Massachusetts or Virginia and the dispersion of the populace guarantees that modern Americans would feel no personal connection to the act and, thus, it would be forgotten.
MBV: Why don’t we try it and see what happens? Heinlein’s dictum about naked force applies here, and I don’t think I’ve mistaken the audience. Broken windows are a poll of sorts, measuring how upset otherwise law-abiding folks are at events. In our recent history, the Civil Rights movement toiled in non-violent struggle well below the national threshhold of anyone actually doing anything beyond clucking their tongues UNTIL the advent of the Deacons for Defense and Justice, the Black Panthers and urban riots threatened racial civil conflict. THEN the federal government got serious about enforcing civil rights laws. Ben Franklin said “Nothing concentrates the mind so wonderfully as the prospect of being hung in the morning.” Broken windows all over the country may at least be considered a wake-up call for a noose measurement appointment.
Goldfinger: But why should this even be considered? Is illegal immigration poised to destroy us as Mr. Vanderboegh claims? Do we face the threat of oppression and denial of basic human freedoms as did Samuel Adams?
MBV: The “threat”? Certainly the Founders’ would say so.
Goldfinger: Do the Mexican immigrants hold in their asparagus stained hands the keys to our destruction? Certainly not. There is not one charge leveled against the illegal Mexican immigrant that was not leveled against the European immigrants of the past, except one: now it’s illegal.
MBV: No. The fact is that current Mexican illegals (and this is by far the greatest component of the influx) do not wish to learn English nor do they wish to become American citizens. This is borne out by opinion polls of the illegals themselves. In any case, it is precisely the corrosion to the rule of law that makes them the greatest threat to our liberties. Nothing is more deleterious to a free society than the suspicion that there is one set of rules for one group and one for another. Here, by codifying law-beaking on a massive scale, the mandarin class is telling us that we no longer live in a society of laws, but a society of men. “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” This is sowing the wind to reap the whirlwind.
Goldfinger: Drain on the system? Check.
MBV: Total Crap. What welfare guarantees existed for the folks who came through legally at Ellis Island? What tax-payer dollars were expended on them after their entrance? Did they have WIC? Unemployment? Guaranteed health care? Housing payments? The full panoply of the modern welfare state will become available to these newly-minted “citizens” in the millions. And you thought Social Security was going to be a problem in the future.
Goldfinger: Refusal to assimilate? Check.
MBV: The charge was made by nativists, certainly, but almost all of those immigrants came here WANTING to be American, striving to learn English, wanting to be accepted. They did NOT say, “I want to make a bunch of money and go back to the shtetl in Poland.” And what about the Reconquista activists who embrace the idea of “Republica Del Norte”? You think they might be able to sell their theories to a large number of new, poorly educated and poorly paid voters eager to see insults to their national pride and machismo vindicated by independence from the “gabachos”?
Goldfinger: Taking jobs from Americans? Check.
Bringing criminal cultures with them? Check.
MBV: MS-13 and the Mexican drug cartels make Al Capone look like a Methodist.
Goldfinger: Sending money back to the homeland? Check.
All of these were leveled at the great waves of Chinese, Irish, Italian, Jewish, Polish, and Russian immigrants. Get that straight in your head. Every single charge was made against every group. Hell, the argument could be made that many of them still refuse to assimilate. Little Italy? Chinatown? The Diamond District? Half the fucking civil servants in Boston? These ethnic enclaves serve as incubators for Americans, not threats to our way of life.
MBV: Even if I accept the premise without argument, what were the percentages of immigrants to the overall population that they assimilated to? Taking 60 million (illegals plus family members south of the border) and dropping them at once into a population of 300 million dwarfs anything ever seen. Plus, that was in an expanding industrial economy providing a pathway to a better life. We see now with the shrinking housing market how problematic that’s going to be for this vast new underclass. Make ‘em citizens and they’re all an even greater drain on the taxpayer than anyone ever imagined. (Except us brick-throwers.)
Goldfinger: What’s the worst case scenario? Mexican immigrants become the majority? What would happen then? Well, I can tell you. You see, for the past five years I’ve lived in a town in Washington State that is fully sixty percent Hispanic, most of them immigrants, many of them illegal. Certainly there were differences (most of the signs were in Spanish for instance –many dispensed with English all together), but there was nothing earth-shattering. It didn’t turn into little Tijuana on Cinco de Mayo; there weren’t shootouts in the streets; no kidnapping for ransom; no South American Drug Lords working me over like I was an extra in Three Amigos, no roving bands of Mariachi’s with half of the Springfield Armory in their guitar cases.
MBV: Good for you, but your experience is not typical. I can give you dozens of anecdotal examples contrary. Can you say: MS-13? Can you say neighborhoods turned into “colonias” with forty in house? Can you say “LA”?
Goldfinger: Life was normal. American even. The kids watch Barney and Dragon Tales and learn English in the schools, then they go on to college and get packed full of the same stuff that other American kids get packed full of and by the third generation they are as American as somebody born in Lincoln’s Log Cabin.
MBV: You may not have noticed but they don’t teach “American” in the colleges anymore, they teach multi-cultural, politically correct identity politics and collectivism.
Goldfinger: Certainly nothing worth the hyperbole “the devil will walk abroad and our children’s, children’s children will curse us.”
MBV: A nice, if obviously clumsy, attempt at out-of-context false argument. Those words refer to what will happen if there is a racial civil war. You HAVE heard of the Law of Unintended Consequences?
Goldfinger: As far as politicians spitting on the Constitution in regards to this issue. I’ve checked my handy-dandy desktop copy of the Constitution and I can’t see a single bloody reference to immigration anywhere. So perhaps what Mr. Vanderboegh takes umbrage with is politicians ignoring the will of the people? OK, I can see that, but the responsibility of citizens then is to change the politicians, not to become ineffective criminals.
MBV: In the largest sense, this isn’t about immigration, illegal or otherwise, except as a tool that the elites will use to finally swamp the bill of rights and trump the ability of contrarians like us to effect political change through the ballot box. You don’t want to see the results when that happens. Because then it WILL be a matter of guns and not of bricks. We will then have let it go too far without bloody correction, which is what I am trying to avoid. We will only know if we are “ineffective” criminals if we try and fail. We’ve tried everything else. With a nod to Claire Wolfe, I’m trying to suggest a way to avoid “shooting the bastards.” Let’s break a few windows and see what happens.
Naked Girls and Women…
Sorry, it just sounds like a crazy idea for me :)…
World’s History at Culture Club…
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting…
Business Ideas Forum…
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting…