By Brandon Smith
Multiculturalism as a subversive movement is the defining political schism of our time. Is is the fulcrum point for numerous civilization changing events and a direct trigger for the exponential decline of the western world. Anyone who ignores the effects of multiculturalism will be oblivious to the many disruptions coming to our lives today and in the near future.
In 1992, Bill Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, Strobe Talbott (a member of the globalist Council On Foreign Relations) wrote an essay for Time Magazine called “The Birth Of The Global Nation.” In that article, he outlined the globalist view of national sovereignty as temporary and cultural boundaries as obstacles that could be subdued by luring countries into economic interdependency.
Talbott dismissed cultural distinctions as arbitrary and cited the incoming formation of the European Union as an example of supranational governance over otherwise separate and unique cultural identities.
However, the globalists ran into some problems. Westerners might have been able to create supranational ties because of shared cultural roots, but they were not going to open their borders to the rest of the world without being forced. From around 2012 onward, a program of multiculturalism was introduced with mass immigration as the primary weapon.
We have seen disastrous results ever since. Portions of Europe are facing societal collapse, and this was by design. Keep in mind, globalism does not necessarily need borders to fully disappear, but it does need national identities and loyalties to disappear. Specifically, western societies must be diluted and their heritage erased for the globalist “New World Order” to move forward.
The fastest way to do that is to overwhelm western demographics with mass movements of people who hold completely contrary ideals . In light of the plague of riots in France this past week led by mobs of migrants and Marxist activists (globalists), I thought it might be important to once again clarify why the third world should never be allowed to settle in the western world. The threat is not just from globalists; it also comes from the same migrants that globalists use as a battering ram against the west.
Like the great catastrophes of the past, from the Bronze Age collapse to the fall of Rome and the near destruction of Europe in the Middle Ages, mass immigration of certain groups (often aided by corrupt governments) annihilates progress, cripples security and erases cultural stability.
Unlike Europe, the US under the Trump Administration has seen major successes this year in blocking illegal (and “legal”) immigration from third world enclaves (Muslim immigration has plunged by 96%). So much so that leftists (and some libertarians) are outraged over the epic drop in Muslim and Hindu migrants. Their argument in favor of the multicultural agenda? They claim that America was founded with the intention of open immigration of ALL peoples.
This is simply not so. In fact, the Founders were highly selective about who they allowed into the US. Our constitutional heritage is often used as a justification for multiculturalism. However, these claims are based on deception and a deliberate misrepresentation of our roots.
The United States was never a migrant “melting pot”. This idea has been perpetuated over the past several decades in popular media and political discourse until it became sacrosanct in the minds of many Americans, but it’s not real – It has always been a fantasy fabricated by Hollywood and the political left.
There has also been a comprehensive effort among “independent” organizations to misrepresent the intentions of the Founders. The motive is to sell conservatives and independent voters on the notion that third-world immigration is perfectly in line with the constitutional framework of our nation.
I see this claim often among more left-leaning libertarian activists as much as I see it among progressives; the idea that borders are somehow contrary to the American virtues of freedom. These people simply don’t know their history, or they are ignoring history in favor of their own narratives. If the Founders’ original system was in place today, America would look dramatically different and far less liberal.
At the very beginning of America’s national history, the Founding Fathers established the Naturalization Act of 1790, allowing only “free white people of good moral character” to immigrate as legal citizens. The standard remained in place in one form or another for hundreds of years and did not officially end until 1952 with the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Then came the Hart-Celler Act of 1965 under Lyndon B. Johnson (Johnson’s liberal policies have become an enduring nightmare for the US ever since his presidency). The Hart-Celler Act ended the National Origins quota of the 1920s, which required that the vast majority of immigrants come from European nations and restricted migrants from third-world countries.
The argument that the Founders imagined America as a sprawling buffet for every malcontent in the world is utterly fabricated. They did not view the US as an open air bazaar welcoming any culture from any backwater location to take advantage of what our ancestors built over the course of centuries. The vast majority of migrants up until the 1960s were from western nations with similar cultural foundations. The melting pot claim is a lie.
The Founders did not intend for cultures with completely incompatible religious and ideological beliefs to take root in the US. And if these people did immigrate, assimilation was expected and required. While the Founders argued in favor of religious freedom, they understood that certain groups exist as an antithesis to the western ideal.
For example, Thomas Jefferson bought a Qur’an in 1765 mainly as a legal and historical text and later used Islam as an example of a religion that, in his view, stifled freedom of thought and relied on coercion.
John Adams once listed Muhammad among “sober inquirers after truth,” yet in other writings he described him as a military fanatic (this is usually the case after people go deeper into Islam and learn the ugly details).
Contemporary Protestant writers of the era commonly considered Islam an ideology spread by the sword and as a political system more than a religious system. Back then they still hadn’t forgotten the horrors of the Muslim invasions into Europe; invasions that led to the Crusades. America’s very first war overseas was an executive action without the approval of congress against the Barbary Pirates – Fanatics backed by Muslim governments that had been terrorizing European ships for centuries.
Hinduism and other Asian or African traditions received less detailed comment from the Founders and were usually grouped under “pagan” or “Gentoo.” The presence of these groups was sparse or non-existent in the US until the mid-1900s. Most slaves who practiced native religions ultimately converted to Christianity, or their children did.
The US banned the importation of slaves in 1808 under a law signed by Thomas Jefferson.
Many Founding Fathers including Jefferson, Madison and Monroe wanted to deport slaves back to Africa to a colony under American protection rather than continue the institution – Not just because they had misgivings about the practice, but because they were concerned that the slaves, even if they were freed, would ultimately be incompatible with western culture and that conflicts would arise.
Jefferson laid this out clearly in “Notes on the State of Virginia” (Query XIV, 1785). He called slavery a moral and political evil and favored gradual emancipation, but argued that freed blacks and whites could not live together peacefully. In other words, even Jefferson, a staunch defender of personal liberty, understood that certain cultures will inevitably clash if kept in proximity and in large numbers.
This is not to say that black people can’t function in the US or Europe, many clearly do just fine. But it is also clear according to the crime rates (13% of the population and 50% of the violent crime) and political stats (87% supporting leftist policies) that Jefferson was right to be concerned.
The Founders were realists who respected practical limits on society for the sake of stability; they were not anarchists. That is to say, they understood than not all freedoms are good and some restrictions must be applied, including borders and logical cultural discrimination. I would argue that if their rules were still in place today, America would be far better off. Specifically their limits on immigration.
Before the 1960s, about 84% of the foreign-born population in the U.S. had migrated from Europe or Canada. Latin American inflows existed (especially from Mexico) but were much smaller in scale than they have been in recent years.
The Hart-Cellars Act abolished country-specific quotas and replaced them with a system emphasizing family immigration. This opened legal pathways from Asia, Latin America, Africa, and elsewhere. New immigrant flows then shifted rapidly: By the 1970s, the majority of arriving immigrants came from Latin America and Asia rather than Europe.
Immigration from Europe and Canada fell from 84% in 1960 to 42% by 1980 and only 13% in recent years. Latin America and Asia became the dominant regions of origin for new citizens. It is not a coincidence that from the mid-1960s onward the US suffered increasing economic and social instability, along with skyrocketing crime rates.
It was not until Donald Trump took office in 2025 that illegal border crossings plummeted back to 1960s levels and third world migrant populations have actually started shrinking.
The establishment of LBJ’s unprecedented welfare rollout combined with surging immigration led to an intense strain on US debt and infrastructure. It’s not surprising that the dollar was decoupled from gold only a few years later; it was the only way to artificially increase the money pool to pay for so many federal subsidies. As in Europe, the majority of third world migrants in the US utilize welfare as soon as they arrive.
As I noted in my article “Pillagers vs Producers: There’s Only Two Ways To Save The Western World”, there is an inherent instinct among certain cultures to either build wealth and resources, or steal wealth and resources. The third world is largely rooted in pillaging; we have seen proof of this time and time again.
Is some cases this is because they operate on tribal methods that have not changed for thousands of years. In other cases, it is because people from undeveloped nations are conditioned to accept and even defend socialism and authoritarianism – modernized forms of pillaging. They have never lived any other way and western ideals of self reliance, independence, free markets and meritocracy are completely alien to them. The government is mother and father and if they want something they must beg the government for it, or loot it.
Pillagers cannot live peacefully with producers. It’s impossible. And for the leftists who claim that the west is “the biggest pillager of all”, the facts say otherwise. When European colonists came to the Americas, or to Africa or India, what they found was perpetually warring tribes, human sacrifice, cannibalism, genocide, slavery and little semblance of long term infrastructure. These places were wastelands.
They left these countries with the most modern technology and infrastructure of the age. And what did these people do with that inherited wealth? Nothing. They let it decay, or stripped it for temporary gains at the expense of long term stability. One need only look at what happened to South Africa in the last 30 years to see that westerners produce, and third worlders pillage.
According to polling data and voting data, third worlders lean overwhelmingly left when it comes to government power and open borders. Muslim respondents maintain some fundamentalist social beliefs which are considered conservative, but generally favor bigger government (71%), immigration openness (82%), and believe racial and ethnic diversity “strengthens” the U.S. (82%). Indian/Hindu migrants poll very close to the same numbers. Meaning, immigrants will always perpetuate more immigrants, especially when immigration is made easy and they don’t have to work hard to earn citizenship.
Is the lack of multiculturalism the same as “ethno-nationalism”? Not exactly. Ethnic dominance is not the same as cultural dominance, though the Founding Fathers envisioned both for America. At bottom, third world cultures should be largely removed from the US, or at the very least, limited enough that they are not able to organize into sprawling ethnic communities which prevent assimilation.
This is not just to thwart the machinations of globalism, it’s also to protect the west from predatory invasions.
There is nothing in the birth of this nation that requires us to tolerate foreign influx. America is not a piece of clay for them to mold as they please. It is not an “economic zone” for them to pilfer. It is a nation and a culture built by western adventurers, settlers, conquerors and their descendants. No one else is entitled to live here and if they get the chance, they should feel lucky.
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE.
The dollar buys less today than it did a year ago, a decade ago, a generation ago. That slide is the predictable result of endless printing and borrowing. Dr. Ron Paul believes the FED has the answer. But they’re keeping it to themselves. Fortunately, a new financial chart has publicly exposed their secret moves. See it for yourself HERE.
You can contact Brandon Smith at:
You can also follow me at –
TwitterX: @AltMarket1
28 Comments
“Multiculturalism as a subversive movement is the defining political schism of our time.”
‘Multiculturalism’ is also where the roots of what is often erroneously and reflexively called ‘Racism’ are found as well. At root, there is nothing wrong with favoring one’s own race for it is within your own race that you most often find cultural and spiritual cohesion and identity. Look at the so-called Chosen People in the Middle East and in America and elsewhere. They don’t exactly embrace other skin tones and other cultures into their society, do they? They know the sense of community and continuity that one gets from having a culture that is not so… Multi-cultured. The so-called Chosen favor the so-called Chosen… and no one complains. But if a White person prefers to associate mostly or solely with Whites they are judged and labeled as ‘racist’ and the most horrible of persons alive? Sorry, but that this also part of the subversive social-engineering movement that seeks to damage and destroy White culture world-wide and replace it forever with multicultural confusion and lack of historical and social identity.
.
Racism simply for the sense of hating is always wrong in all forms. Period. But there is nothing wrong with identifying more with your own race and culture. That is quite natural and human. But that is not allowed with Multiculturalism.
.
Even in Melting Pot America when all the immigrants began to come to this country by the millions in the early 1900s… what did they do when they got here? They stayed in tight local communities consisting of those from their own country and language of origin. Some of this was by economic necessity but most of this was by choice. America may have had a Melting Pot of sorts… but it was not where all the ingredients went into a big bowl and got all blended together to become unrecognizable. It was more like a bowl where all the ingredients pretty much stayed intact within themselves.
.
Eventually, America and many other Nations began to see races and cultures more inter-mixed. And that is fine as well as long as this is done voluntary among the people. But in general… multiculturalism in most any other form has been an utter failure and socially damaging. That is the raw truth that few dare to acknowledge. This is multiculturalism as a tool of weaponization intended to destroy.
.
America may some day have something that those who favor multiculturalism will call a great new type of American and America. But you can be sure that this will only come about when Whites are thoroughly diminished and cultures of Those Not-White are elevated to the highest of social and cultural positions. We can see this now on the television. More and more faces are non-white at all levels… from news anchors and reporters to actors to commercials to even those who do voice-overs. Those are not White voices that we hear doing many to most of the work on mass media.
.
Again, this is not to prevent anyone of any race from having any position they choose. This is about calling about an obvious sidelining of Whites and blatant racism against Whites in media and elsewhere all being engineering from the decision makes at the top who have an agenda which they are carrying out with ruthlessness. White actors in Hollywood that are not mega box-office stars are saying no one will hire them… and that’s not just the fault of AI. It’s because their skin isn’t dark enough.
.
As humans created by God, we have no color. When we die, we have no color. But while we’re on Earth… we have a color and culture. And no culture should be under assault from those who seek to sideline and erase a particular race just to further a sickly Globalist agenda to eventually total destroy and erase human society from Planet Earth.
.
Some people are so afraid of being called racist that they become willing participants in the erasure of their culture. But the real racists are the demented ones who are trying to erase that culture.
.
The real racists are hiding in big offices and in think-tanks and in the darkest corners of the human psyche.
Bravo Brandon! Another perfect article on what is destroying the United States from within. The enemies of America have invaded us without a shot being fired. Including the perspectives of the founding fathers is so important to understand. We are in a not so quiet war for survival.
Kruschev said just that in 1960 on nationwide tv.
He said we will bury you without a shot being fired.
I believe his son is still alive. He went to Brown University from what I read decades ago.
I read your rantings just for laughs as you are a know nothing. Just one point to show that you are lying or dumb. There were Spanish and mixed race Spanish in Florida Texas New Mexico Arizona and California before those areas became part of America. So there were nonwhite and white Spanish here already. The borders were actually quite fluid between the US and Mexico as people came to work or open businesses.
As far as black Americans and white Americans getting along actually they usually do. And there were many black Americans whom joined the American Revolution to throw the British out. Note after the war many tories were sent packing AKA deported and guess what? They were white. I can continue but you are either uneducated or are a white nationalist propagandist
This might be the single most painfully retarded comment I have yet seen, and that’s really saying something. You cite Texas and Florida as examples of “mixed-race” America, but also admit that neither Texas or Florida were part of the US at that time. Meaning, there was no “melting pot”, no border crossings into the US and the Spanish holdings in Florida were the only regions where we shared a border. Guess what the Spanish population of that massive area was at that time? Less that 5000 people. No one was immigrating.————————-
This includes AFTER Florida and Texas were acquired by the US in 1821 – We had entire wars with Mexico and Spain over the integrity of those borders. Furthermore, the existence of black Americans in America was never in dispute, you dimwit, nor is the role some of them have played in the country’s progress. This does not change the fact that there have been constant cultural clashes between the two races for the past 150 years and black Americans are GREATLY overrepresented in crime stats (Thomas Jefferson was right, to an extent). Finally, what does the deportation of traitors have to do with this article? Not a thing. Though, I highly agree with this practice and I think we should do the same thing with communists today. They want to burn the US to the ground? Boot them out.
“… there have been constant cultural clashes between the two races for the past 150 years and black Americans are GREATLY overrepresented in crime stats…”.
.
When one looks at the strenuous and torturous efforts made in and since the 1960s to ‘equalize’ the legal and social status of races – many of which amounting to force-feeding hard-core social re-engineering (some of which was justifiable and other parts not)… to see where we are today is tragic and heartbreaking.
.
Black Americans – except for the super-rich class of athletes and entertainers… and a few other professionals – have not worked to improve their quality of life overall in America hardly at all. Crime and standards of living remain at or even below levels of generations ago. People are still not judged by the content of their character as Dr. King vainly hoped… but on the color of their skin. And those with dark skin tones have not done much of anything to elevate the education level of their youth… or to improve neighborhoods in which they live.. and certainly not the scholastic scores of black youth which are abysmal. In short, blacks have done nothing to improve the quality and state of existence of their race. And in the meantime, they have become openly more hostile toward Whites. That doesn’t exactly help to improve relations among the races.
.
You will never improve your state of being if you prefer and choose (and even celebrate) to see yourself as a Victim Forever and to always blame someone else (always and only Whitey) for all your problems.
.
This is profoundly sad. And Dr. King would be ashamed to see all that has happened over all the years since his “I Have a Dream” speech. Dr. King’s dream has become even more distant than ever.
If we can’t enforce our own immigration laws, then maybe we should adopt Mexico’s. Other countries, such as Thailand, have the same set of rules and enforce them! Michelle Malkin wrote the following piece in 2010 (credited at the end). Anybody care to debate this? Liberals? Of course, as ‘undocumented Democrats’ it was always about voting, as there aren’t enough homegrown Democrats to win national elections.
Mexican president Felipe Calderón has accused Arizona of opening the door “to intolerance, hate, discrimination, and abuse in law enforcement.” But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens. While open-borders activists decry the new enforcement measures signed into law in “Nazi-zona” last week, they remain deaf, dumb, or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south.
The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal-alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien-registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they are in the U.S. legally. If those rules constitute the racist, fascist, xenophobic, inhumane regime that the National Council of La Raza, Al Sharpton, Catholic bishops, and their grievance-mongering followers claim, then what about these regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners?
‐ The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?
‐ If outsiders do not enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome. Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam, and prove they can provide their own health care.
‐ Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal-alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).
‐ Law-enforcement officials at all levels — by national mandate — must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal-alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration-enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens’ arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.
‐ Ready to show your papers? Mexico’s National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens’ identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.
All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico’s Ley General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.–based Center for Security Policy. There’s been no public clamor for “comprehensive immigration reform” in Mexico, however, because pro-illegal-alien speech by outsiders is prohibited.
Consider: Open-borders protesters marched freely at the Capitol building in Arizona, comparing Republican governor Jan Brewer to Hitler, waving Mexican flags, advocating that demonstrators “smash the state,” and holding signs that proclaimed “No human is illegal” and “We have rights.”
But under the Mexican constitution, such political speech by foreigners is banned. Noncitizens cannot “in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.” In fact, a plethora of Mexican statutes enacted by its congress limit the participation of foreign nationals and companies in everything from investment, education, mining, and civil aviation to electric energy and firearms. Foreigners have severely limited (if any) private-property and employment rights.
As for abuse, the Mexican government is notorious for its abuse of Central American illegal aliens who attempt to violate Mexico’s southern border. The Red Cross has protested rampant Mexican police corruption, intimidation, and bribery schemes targeting illegal aliens there for years. Mexico didn’t respond by granting mass amnesty to illegal aliens, as it is demanding that we do. It clamped down on its borders even further. In late 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtain illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun.
Meanwhile, Mexican consular offices in the United States have coordinated with left-wing social-justice groups and the Catholic Church’s leadership to demand a moratorium on all deportations and a freeze on all employment raids across America.
Mexico is doing the job Arizona is now doing — a job the U.S. government has failed miserably to do: putting its people first. Here’s the proper rejoinder to all the hysterical demagogues in Mexico (and their sympathizers here on American soil) now calling for boycotts and invoking Jim Crow laws, apartheid, and the Holocaust because Arizona has taken its sovereignty into its own hands:
Hipócritas.
– Michelle Malkin is the author of Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies (Regnery 2010). © 2010 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
Double standards are everywhere. See the way US criminal laws are enforced these days for reference (Fauci is still a free man.) It’s not supposed to make sense, it’s just subversive propaganda and rackets. Some people are trying to build with lies, chaos, and subversion and others with truth, justice, and morals. Welcome to the war of good vs evil.
I’ve been fighting this war for a good long time, thank you very much, and not just with words. I agree with Brandon that when the hammer finally drops, it won’t be pretty for the left.
Let’s not kid ourselves what’s behind this is the rich donor class who want a bottomless pit of cheap labor. Obama lives on Martha’s Vineyard a Lilly white filthy rich enclave. The vineyard is 98% white the few nonwhites are mostly rich Asians. Don’t they care if they end up on welfare won’t they be taxed to pay for it. Their lobbyists will poke wholes in the tax code that their lawyers & accountants will drive a brinks truck through .
Another excellent article.
I credit Brandon for helping me see the threat of what I’ll call the “left” – these radical pillagers – in addition to the “globalists.” Both, of course, need to be removed. But the left is so radically violent, unhinged, sadistic, and godless that even without the globalists, they are a huge threat to civilization.
I hope some of the libertarians will recognize this issue, because I have yet to see libertarians offer ANY solution that would work in REAL life. (I am completely open-minded here; if they have real solutions, I am willing to hear them.)
Globalists must go.
The left must go.
The pillagers must go.
But, simultaneously, it is up to us to rebuild. And we can! Let’s get to it. Strong families led by men is an excellent place to begin.
It all started when those Commie frogs attacked us with the statue of liberty !!!
It appears that the influx of immigrants from places like Africa, Asia, and the Middle East has (somewhat) awakened us to the emergency. Latinos have been the most visible for years because they are the largest immigrant group, are more likely to be non-English speakers for first generation and are more likely to be poor. But least they come from a Christian culture and are generally seen as more interested in economic advantage rather than conquest.
That said, I propose a bill:
Non-citizens may not own property
Non-citizens may not collect welfare of any kind (including no non-citizens in public schools)
All government-produced literature is in English only
No birthright citizenship
Naturalized citizens may not hold office
Naturalized citizens may not vote
Naturalized citizens must pledge allegiance to the US (publicly promoting Anti-American values constitutes violation of this oath, subject to deportation/jail)
Deport/jail all illegals
Revoke almost all H1B and similar visas
DACA qualifiers with no criminal history have timeframe (6 months) to become legal citizens or deport
Open to more ideas if you can think of any.
Stephen,
Excellent points…the 800 pound gorilla in the room is Islam.
1. Designate Islam a predatory terrorist political ideology…an existential threat.
2. Outlaw Islam and ban the Koran, Sira, and Hadith.
3. Ban all Muslim entry into the country…for any reason.
4. Deport all Muslims who refuse to renounce Islam and embrace apostacy.
5. Lay waste to all existing mosques and Islamic centers and replace with Christian churches.
6. Outlaw and prosecute all Islamist front organizations such as CAIR, MAS, ICNA, MSA, ISNA, et al.
7. Identify, place, and monitor all Islamic sympathizers and apologists on the national counterterrorism watch list for threats of subversion and coercive criminal activities.
8. Remain steadfast and vigilant.
It is against the founding documents that any citizen can be forced to renounce their chosen religion/creed.
The initial settlers (less Jamestown) came to escape that very thing. This is why you see the separation of church and state. The state religion of Anglicanism was corrupted and powerful. The People now had the Bible in their language and could see where the teachings and practises were errant. Refusal by the leaders of the Church to come into alignment with the Bible was the reason these people were persecuted by their own church/state.
It is un-American to the core, immoral and a violation of free will to force a person to renounce their religion.
That’s legally the case, for now. Go back 100 years and what is “American” is quite different from the liberal version today. It would be better to simply deport such people, not try to force them to change their religion. Islam has no place in the western world, and the Founders understood this. Which is why they blocked the immigration of anyone from a third world country by default.
Our Constitution is not a suicide pact either!
GREAT ARTICLE, Brandon !!!! Once again, you have nailed it – the best explanation I have read that expresses so eloquently everything I have been thinking, but with great clarification – especially the FOUNDERS’ observations and intentions. It’s time to return to the founding principles of our Constitution, which scores 700 on ‘The HAWKINS SCALE of CONSCIOUSNESS’ = enormous INTEGRITY, ENLIGHTENMENT, beyond the pettiness of most human minds. THANK YOU.
Immigration, Infiltrating, intermarrying and plundering have always been far more effective means of taking over a country than military might.
Remember the error of The mad prophet Balam? The enemies of Israel asked the Prophet to curse the Jews and he said, I won’t do it, but for money I will tell you how to destroy them. Then he proceeded to tell them to intermarry with the Jews to mix races and destroy them.
That why the “founding fathers” murdered millions of indigenous native Americans.
No, the founders didn’t “murder” the Native Americans. Most indians died of various diseases which could not be controlled by the founders. Furthermore, the indians were not the “peaceful” and moral people often portrayed in movies. Most tribes were absolutely barbaric by today’s standards, including slavery, human sacrifice, cannibalism and genocide. They attacked and killed colonists regularly, so let’s call it mutual combat. They would have had to assimilate into western culture anyway, otherwise they could not be allowed to continue existing.
There were cases such as Squanto in which they got along fine. Some Indians were converted to Christianity.
According to my calendar, Monday October 12th is Indigenous Peoples Day. The left proclaims that indigenous people are the rightful owners of our land and that white Europeans took it from them. But consider this: is this not what the left is doing when they open the flood gates to our country and allow illegals to invade? Yes it is. I bet you will never hear this argument taught to college mush heads. As usual, the left are manipulating, lying, tyrant hypocrites with a big power agenda.
Multiculturalism is one of many heresies like Islam, Judaism and homosexuality that have been plaguing the western world for far too long.
Has anyone considered that America’s so-called “melting pot'” was foisted on us in the 20th century by conscripting young men and sending them to fight her wars? Let’s face it in the 80 years since turn of the century we fielded an amalgam of nearly every race to send over “there.”When you are a conscript in combat with your life on the line, racial and ethnic matters can quickly disappear the fighting commences. Many times you are dependent upon the man fighting with you to keep you alive and what color or faith your “buddy” comes from never matters. Bonds are formed under fire. Most vets who have been through that make no mention of that when they relate their experiences. They forgot it. Veterans of WW2 came back stateside to a world that had changed from another era and whatever misconceptions they had prior to their return changed as well.
The era of third world immigration came in the mid-1960s, well after WWII. Also, units during the war were strictly segregated.
A decade in South Africa, during and after Apartheid, showed me beyond any doubts that all cultures are not equal and a majority black culture is incapable of running a first world infrastructure effectively. I believe Ian Smith’s (Rhodesian PM) concept of a qualified vote was the only feasible way to maintain western civilization / culture in an African context short of full on Apartheid. However, the world will never consent for a country to run on merit.
Lincoln actually wanted to deport all the blacks back to Africa and if they wouldn’t take them (IIRC) central or south America.