The Mexican Invasion

[Gothmog]

It strikes me that Texas, among many other parts of the US, is being inundated with Hispanic immigrants (both legal and illegal), mainly of the Mexican variety . Now, my knowledge of things far south of my location is quite limited, so forgive me if I am in error in some of my assumptions.

 

Doesn't this wave of immigration (especially the illegal variety) constitute an informal if non military invasion, and what will be the result? Will the southern states (especially Texas) be eventually absorbed into Mexico by sheer numbers alone (through plebiscite or eventual revolution)? Will Mexico be absorbed into the US, perhaps splitting along ethnic lines (European vs native descent)? Will this wave of immigrants be absorbed into the American melting pot? Will the US government find a way to reduce illegal immigration to an easily managed trickle?

 

Perhaps I should have made this a poll? Well, lets see where the discussion goes on this one ...

[Doble Troble]

I think part of the problem we're having with Mexican immigration is that they're not "melting" (in the US melting pot) readily enough. They seem resistant to giving up their language and customs and adopting those of the US.

 

If we could somehow encourage better "melting" the situation will be improved - but not eliminated.

 

In my younger days in high school I used to make some decent spare cash by repairing irrigation lines in avacado groves. I was assisted by illegals who dug the trenches. Those guys were the hardest working and kindest coworkers I ever had. They lived in a camp in a wash and probably made half of what I did. But they outworked me every day. This was in the late '70s. From what fritz reports things seem to have changed. But from my experience our country needs these kind of hardworking and uncomplaining people. We're rapidly becoming a nation of whining do nothings with a sense of entitilement. Maybe this is why the Mexicans don't want to melt.

[Gothmog]

I think you make some good points DT ... what information I have stumbled across on immigration suggests that when the immigration rate is quite high, blending with the majority culture will be problematic.

[fritz]

That's a lot questions, this late at night. But I can answer a few.

 

Yes, Texas will eventually become (if not already) assimilated into the hispanic culture.

 

With the help of our federal government, by the way. Which should answer another question about whether they will ever do anything substantial to ease the illegal entries.

 

As to calling it an invasion by the Mexicans, we have been invaded by them before. Pancho Villa launched a raid on US territory and went back across the border safely. Oh sure, the US sent troops down there to get him, but he had the protection of the native people to hide him. He had more trouble from his own people than the US, and was eventually asassinated.

 

Whether you could call Santa Anna a raider (since Mexico legally owned Texas until the whole thing was decide in battle), he was a dictator. And we don't like dictators over here. Unless we elect them to office in DC.

 

Right now, the ones being on the front lines in this invasion are the ranchers and landowners. And they are the ones who asked for help from the Minuteman group. They were getting absolutely no help from INS, or the local law, until recently when public pressure became so great. A former deputy tells of a time years ago when the sheriff's office helped find jobs for the illegals, instead of sending them back to Mexico.

 

fritz

[Gothmog]

Yes, Texas will eventually become (if not already) assimilated into the hispanic culture.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm quite interested in the eventual political implications ... as you say, the cultural shift is ongoing and quite evident.

 

Given the apparent unwillingness to deal with this influx, where will this go in terms of the political map? I'm leaning towards believing that this is part of a plan to absorb Mexico into the US as part of a "Greater North America" political structure ... that is why NAFTA included Mexico as well as Canada.

[Sailormilan2]

If I remember my history correctly, there was Mexican Army patrol who crossed the border into the USA to defend a town that was supposed to be attacked by a nortorious Mexican bandido. There can be times when we do get along.

But, I do wonder about a group that refers to themselves as "La Raza"........The Race. I guess there are the only true ones in the world. Though, I am not too sure what they are the only true ones of.

[swamprat]

Back when it was decided all government posters and notices had to be printed in English and Spanish the die was cast. Here in Kansas I can buy all types of Mexican food that was not available just a year ago, but you would be hard pressed to find a good German sausage!

 

Swamprat

[karlunity]

Given the apparent unwillingness to deal with this influx, where will this go in terms of the political map? I'm leaning towards believing that this is part of a plan to absorb Mexico into the US as part of a "Greater North America" political structure ... that is why NAFTA included Mexico as well as Canada.

 

That is interesting...more cheap labor and a far bigger liberal vote!

 

Still if you consider that the party in power is from Texas, you would expect them to care about the state.

Karl

[Gothmog]

Given the apparent unwillingness to deal with this influx, where will this go in terms of the political map? I'm leaning towards believing that this is part of a plan to absorb Mexico into the US as part of a "Greater North America" political structure ... that is why NAFTA included Mexico as well as Canada.

 

That is interesting...more cheap labor and a far bigger liberal vote!

 

Still if you consider that the party in power is from Texas, you would expect them to care about the state.

Karl

That is worth thinking about ... you will note that GWB courted the Hispanic vote and that there is some reluctance to fully defend against illegal immigration. I'm not so sure Hispanics will vote Democrat once they have a piece of the economic pie ... I suspect their more traditional outlook may persuade them that a 'family values' party might be a better bet. Perhaps this is the plan .... plans fail sometimes though.

 

Another consideration is to implement political union very slowly in order to minimize 'teething pains' or perhaps raise the Mexican standard of living to the point that immigration reverses flow or at least halts.

[karlunity]

Mexican standard of living to the point that immigration reverses flow or at least halts.

 

If the peons start to think like freemen, what happens to Mr. Foxx and the upper class in Mexico? It is in many ways more than money with the Dons, it is a matter of pride and family honor. Will his Lordship cater to the commons just to make a few more bucks in a North American Free Trade Zone?

 

Karl

[Gothmog]

Mexican standard of living to the point that immigration reverses flow or at least halts.

 

If the peons start to think like freemen, what happens to Mr. Foxx and the upper class in Mexico? It is in many ways more than money with the Dons, it is a matter of pride and family honor. Will his Lordship cater to the commons just to make a few more bucks in a North American Free Trade Zone?

 

Well, they cut the NAFTA deal didn't they?

 

I think it shows intent to move in that direction ... heaven knows Mexico could use increased stability and prosperity. Perhaps Fox is thinking of his 'legacy', if not his pocket book.

[fritz]

"Still if you consider that the party in power is from Texas, you would expect them to care about the state.

Karl "

 

Actually, that was answered by a previous post--cheaper labor (albeit illegal) and more liberal votes.

 

The party in power now wants those votes. As to cheaper labor, they want that also.

 

How can GW better get a chance at more votes for him and fight the unions, any better than by ignoriing the problem of the illegals? The problem seems to be not his. So is he looking out for the best interests of the state of Texas?

 

In the view of the companies that hire this cheap (albeit illegal) labor--yes.

 

In the view of the landowners here in South Texas---HELL NO! Just as what was replied to the Minuteman organizer at our first meeting when he asked the audience if they felt the federal government was doing enough to stop the illegal immigrants. The resounding answer was "Hell no!"

 

Sailormilan2,

Where was the "Mexican army patrol" on March 9, 1916 during the raid by a bunch of guerrillas led by Villa upon the town of Columbus, NM?

 

I know some history also, and I never heard of a Mexican army patrol crossing over here to help us out. Maybe they did, I just never heard of it. And I bet they did not help very much, if any.

 

CG,

"I'm quite interested in the eventual political implications ... as you say, the cultural shift is ongoing and quite evident."

 

The change in the political structure is already here. How else do you explain all the liberal hispanic congressmen (especially a certain one named Hinojosa) introducing a bill in congress to rename our US Post Office in favor of "his friend" Vargas?

 

 

fritz

[Sailormilan2]

Fritz, to the best of my recolection, it was sometime around the time of the Pancho Villa. Though, I am trying to find it now.

But, I found some interesting stuff up on the internet while doing a search for the incident. Stuff, either I hadn't heard about or had forgotten. Mexican army troops shooting a USBP agents, and thing like that. It seems there have been some very serious incidents of Mexican army patrols making excursions into the the U.S. territory.

Funny how it never seems to hit the press.

[karlunity]

by Phyllis Schlafly July 13, 2005

 

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has just let the cat out of the bag about what's really behind our trade agreements and security partnerships with the other North American countries. A 59-page CFR document spells out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."

"Community" means integrating the United States with the corruption, socialism, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

 

"Community" is sometimes called "space" but the CFR goal is clear: "a common economic space ... for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital, and people flow freely." The CFR's "integrated" strategy calls for "a more open border for the movement of goods and people."

 

The CFR document lays "the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America." The "common security perimeter" will require us to "harmonize visa and asylum regulations" with Mexico and Canada, "harmonize entry screening," and "fully share data about the exit and entry of foreign nationals."

 

This CFR document, called "Building a North American Community," asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" and assigned "working groups" to fill in the details.

 

It was at this same meeting, grandly called the North American summit, that President Bush pinned the epithet "vigilantes" on the volunteers guarding our border in Arizona.

 

A follow-up meeting was held in Ottawa on June 27, where the U.S. representative, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, told a news conference that "we want to facilitate the flow of traffic across our borders." The White House issued a statement that the Ottawa report "represents an important first step in achieving the goals of the Security and Prosperity Partnership."

 

The CFR document calls for creating a "North American preference" so that employers can recruit low-paid workers from anywhere in North America. No longer will illegal aliens have to be smuggled across the border; employers can openly recruit foreigners willing to work for a fraction of U.S. wages.

 

Just to make sure that bringing cheap labor from Mexico is an essential part of the plan, the CFR document calls for "a seamless North American market" and for "the extension of full labor mobility to Mexico."

 

The document's frequent references to "security" are just a cover for the real objectives. The document's "security cooperation" includes the registration of ballistics and explosives, while Canada specifically refused to cooperate with our Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).

 

To no one's surprise, the CFR plan calls for massive U.S. foreign aid to the other countries. The burden on the U.S. taxpayers will include so-called "multilateral development" from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, "long-term loans in pesos," and a North American Investment Fund to send U.S. private capital to Mexico.

 

The experience of the European Union and the World Trade Organization makes it clear that a common market requires a court system, so the CFR document calls for "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution." Get ready for decisions from non-American judges who make up their rules ad hoc and probably hate the United States anyway.

 

The CFR document calls for allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities. The CFR document calls for adopting a "tested once" principle for pharmaceuticals, by which a product tested in Mexico will automatically be considered to have met U.S. standards.

 

The CFR document demands that we implement "the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." That's code language for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system.

 

Here's another handout included in the plan. U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges.

 

To ensure that the U.S. government carries out this plan so that it is "achievable" within five years, the CFR calls for supervision by a North American Advisory Council of "eminent persons from outside government . . . along the lines of the Bilderberg" conferences.

 

The best known Americans who participated in the CFR Task Force that wrote this document are former Massachusetts Governor William Weld and Bill Clinton's immigration chief Doris Meissner. Another participant, American University Professor Robert Pastor, presented the CFR plan at a friendly hearing of Senator Richard Lugar's Foreign Relations Committee on June 9.

 

Ask your Senators and Representatives which side they are on: the CFR's integrated North American Community or U.S. sovereignty guarded by our own borders.

 

 

 

http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2005/july05/05-07-13.html

 

Sometimes I do think that it is atarting to feel like the late Roman Republic

 

interesting Karl.