← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · jay
Thread ID: 9052 | Posts: 6 | Started: 2003-08-15
2003-08-15 15:41 | User Profile
[url=http://vdare.com/francis/real_terminator.htm]http://vdare.com/francis/real_terminator.htm[/url]
In California, Immigration Is The Real Terminator By Sam Francis
[VDARE.com Editor's note: Due to power outage, normal hyper-link editing has not been possible at this time.]
Not the least of the evils of the improbable emergence of Arnold Schwarzenegger as a political candidate is that, after years of having to endure journalists' over-worked sport with Ronald Reagan's "Where's the rest of me" and Charlton Heston's roles as Moses and Ben Hur, we now must put up with an endless series of not-very-clever puns on Mr. Schwarzenegger's not-very-good films, the titles of most of which rather easily lend themselves to bad political wordplay: "Conan the Barbarian," "Total Recall," and the interminable "Terminator" movies.
Nevertheless, relief may already loom on the horizon.
Relief in this case is the distinct possibility that by the time of California's special gubernatorial election on October 7, there may not be anyone left in the state to vote in it.
Last week the Los Angeles Times reported that in the last years of the twentieth century, the state actually lost population. "More than 1.4 million people in the U.S. migrated to California from 1995 to 2000, while 2.2 million left - the highest migration numbers in the country," the paper noted, an exodus that one demographer labels "unprecedented."
The stereotype of California in the American mind has long been that it's the place you go where you've already been everywhere else -- the final destination for transcontinental pilgrims from the Gold Rush to Hollywood glitter.
What is unprecedented is that that image is now fading -- along with the people who created it.
And why exactly is it that so many people are leaving the Golden State? The Times really doesn't say.
Another demographer it interviewed suggested as reasons such problems as "housing costs, economic factors and relocation of retirees." Swell, but why are those problems that afflict California in particular?
Could it just possibly be that mass immigration from Mexico and Central America has something to do with it?
Naw, it couldn't possibly be that the arrival of about 12 million immigrants into the state in the last few decades has contributed to overcrowding, less available and affordable housing, higher taxes, more crime, more congestion, and a quality of life that older Americans, who remember a different style of living, would like to avoid.
"The No. 1 reason people move to and from California is because of jobs," the demographer told the paper. All those Americans who refuse to take the jobs the immigrants do, you see, are packing up and leaving the state -- to look for jobs in places where there are fewer immigrants to take them.
Of course, the Open Borders lobby always told us that wouldn't happen, that there would be jobs for everyone regardless of mass immigration.
Well, you know how reliable the Open Borders lobby is.
The theory that mass immigration may have encouraged Californians to pack up and get out is not simply my own wild surmise. As long ago as 1995, in an article in the New York Times Magazine, University of Michigan demographer William H. Frey and reporter Jonathan Tilove wrote about the flight of Americans (mainly whites) from larger metropolitan areas:
"For every immigrant who arrives [in large metropolitan areas], a white person leaves. Look collectively at the New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston and Boston metropolitan areas -- 5 of the top 11 immigration destinations. In the last half of the 80's, for every 10 immigrants who arrived, 9 residents left for points elsewhere. And most of those leaving were non-Hispanic whites.... The places that whites were leaving for were metro areas like Tampa-St. Petersburg, Seattle, Phoenix, Atlanta and Las Vegas, all of which attract relatively few immigrants."
The Los Angeles Times article last week noted that the California fugitives were moving to places like "Nevada, Arizona and Texas," more or less the same places Professor Frey and his co-author mentioned.
What the Times has apparently just noticed happening in California has been going on for years, and as Professor Frey and Mr. Tilove pointed out, "The trend constitutes a new, larger form of white flight." Back in the 1960s, whites fled their neighborhoods and moved to the suburbs as housing was desegregated. Then they fled the suburbs and either created new ones or moved to the country.
Now they are fleeing entire states. Sooner or later they will start leaving the country itself.
It's probably too much to ask that Mr. Schwarzenegger, let alone any of his rivals in the coming election, will try to call attention to the impact that mass immigration has already inflicted on the state they want to govern. A good many of the people who might have voted for a candidate who talked seriously about immigration have probably already left.
For those who are still there by October 7, it probably makes little difference any more for whom they vote or who actually wins.
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
[Sam Francis [email him] is a nationally syndicated columnist. A selection of his columns, America Extinguished: Mass Immigration And The Disintegration Of American Culture, is now available from Americans For Immigration Control. Click here for Sam Francis' website.]
2003-08-15 16:01 | User Profile
** non-Hispanic whites.... **
mestizos aren't white, they are brown as :dung:
2003-08-15 16:17 | User Profile
Originally posted by jay@Aug 15 2003, 09:41 * The places that whites were leaving for were metro areas like Tampa-St. Petersburg, Seattle, Phoenix, Atlanta* and Las Vegas, all of which attract relatively few immigrants."
**
Atlanta? That would be jumping out of the pot and into the fire.
2003-08-16 13:13 | User Profile
Guest column by "Mark A. Dwyer":
[SIZE=3]WORSE THAN DAVIS[/SIZE]
Reportedly, many "Latino communities" across California are in favor of Cruz Bustamante as the next governor of the Golden State. Those Latinos that were interviewed said that they did not know him as a person or a politician, but would support his candidacy anyway because he is "Hispanic". One would wonder if this is because these Latinos are a bunch of racists that judge politicians by the color of their skin or by the sound of their name, or, perhaps, they want to take over this country and see electing Hispanic government as the first step in that direction? We will probably never know what their real motivation was, but here is a plausible explanation. It appears that the key to understanding Latinos' fixation with Hispanic politicians lies in what the elected officials of Hispanic ancestry are cooking for California. On the surface, it may look like they are fighting for the poor and the disadvantaged. But closer scrutiny reveals that the largest group that directly benefits from their legislation is the very "Latino community" that is composed mostly, if not exclusively, of (former) illegal aliens from Mexico and their offspring, compliments of American taxpayers. And the reason for this is simple; whatever "disadvantaged" group one may think of, be it the poor, the uninsured, the unlicensed, or the undocumented, Mexican "migrants" and their families constitute the largest constituency in that group and account for 50% to over 80% of group's population. For instance, out of California's 6.6 million uninsured about two thirds are Mexicans and their children. In addition to that, since 2001, a majority of births in California are "Latinos", which will translate onto their majority in elementary schools in just a few years. (In L.A. School District more that two thirds of pupils in public schools are already "Hispanics".) Here are some details. Rep. Gill Cedillo has been notorious for pushing his driver's licenses "for all that pass the driving test" bill. The main beneficiary of the bill: illegal aliens from Mexico. Sen. John Vasconcellos has been well known for his relentless efforts to increase taxation and spending on public schools and extending free benefits for all enrolled students regardless of the "immigration status" of their parents. The main beneficiary of his efforts: children of illegal aliens from Mexico. When Sen. Vasconcellos'es attention was pointed to the fact of stealing California by Mexican "migrants", he answered: "Since we stole it from them, why is it unfair for them to steal it back from us?" Sen. Richard Alarcon, as soon as he got elected with a help of another "Latino" politician, Sen. Richard Polanco", begun pushing for universal health-care coverage "for all people in California", increase spending on affordable housing, and to remove the 2/3 majority needed to increase local taxes. The main beneficiary of his legislative work: "migrant" workers from Mexico and their families. Sen. Richard Polanco attempted to expand MEDI-CAL coverage so it de facto covers elderly parents of Mexican "migrants" as soon as they manage to follow their kids' path to America. But Polanco's main "contributions to California's political life has been best characterized by one of his fellow lawmakers: "Polanco is about getting Latinos elected, regardless of how he does it". And the list goes on and on. The pattern here seems strikingly clear: Hispanic lawmakers keep passing the laws that benefit their fellow countrymen, most of whom are Mexicans that constitute about two thirds of the population of illegal aliens in California. Naturally, these Hispanic lawmakers are staunchly opposed to any forms of enforcement of the American-Mexican border and American immigration laws so that everybody in Mexico who has legs can rush to America and take advantage of all the freebies, compliments of American taxpayers. No wonder how these Hispanic lawmakers, with a little help of millions of Mexican "migrants" and multitudes of their kids, managed to turn a $10+ billion budget surplus into a $38 billion deficit. (It has been estimated elsewhere that if proposition 187 were not derailed, it would have saved the state about $30 billion annually.) The single most important reason that Governor "Gray" Davis is going to be on the recall ballot is this humongous deficit that has been created under his "stewardship". Although he wasn't the one who authored state budgets, the spending frenzy of a majority of California legislators would not have led to the current fiscal crisis if the governor vetoed the spending bills that they kept sending to his desk. So, Gov. Davis deserves to be removed from office. But electing former Mechista (see [1] for author's commentary about MEChA) Bustamante as a replacement will only turn the budget nightmare from bad to worse as he, most likely, will see to it that all the bills, authored by his "Hispanic" colleagues and passed by the Democrat-dominated pro-Mexican legislature, that funnel American taxpayers money to the growing population of needy people of Mexico temporarily or permanently in California are signed promptly. Those who do not wish to pay for this kind of forced charity to a foreign nation may consider uniting behind an "Americans come first" candidate that is likely to exercise his veto power to keep spending under control, and has a real chance to win the election on October 7, 2003. And those who think that Bustamante is a long shot for the governor should think twice: some prominent Democrats are already suggesting that he may be their best chance to keep governor's mansion away from Republicans. So, be prepared for a tough fight and, perhaps, for voting for a compromise candidate. Because the only worse governor than Davis that legal residents of California can have is Bustamante. REFERENCES [1] Mark Andrew Dwyer: "Fascism grows right here" [url=http://www.americanpatrol.com/MECHA/FacistMEChADwyer020318.html]http://www.americanpatrol.com/MECHA/Facist...wyer020318.html[/url]
2003-08-16 14:21 | User Profile
So, be prepared for a tough fight and, perhaps, for voting for a compromise candidate. Because the only worse governor than Davis that legal residents of California can have is Bustamante.
Man, it always comes back to that. "Vote for the lesser of two evils" I'm tired of that. If I were in CA, I'd vote for Guzzardi. Maybe write-in Tancredo.
2003-08-16 18:17 | User Profile
When California is cemented in 3rd-world status, you can safely bet that racist whites will be blamed. White Flight. The whites looted the state and then ran away with all the wealth. Talk about a case of blaming the victim.