© Paul Ratje/ AFP/ Getty Images
The latest Pew Research Center survey reveals that the overwhelming majority of Americans see the mass migration of people from one country to another as a threat in the midst of the Chinese coronavirus crisis.
About 42 percent of American adults call mass migration a "major threat" to the U.S. Another 39 percent say mass migration is a "minor threat" to the county, while less than 20 percent of American adults see no threat from mass migration.
Likewise, nearly six-in-ten Republican voters and 29 percent of Democrats say mass migration is a major threat to the U.S. When broken down demographically by age, a plurality of 30- to 49-year-olds call mass migration a major threat, along with about 50 percent of Americans at least 50 years old.
The survey is just the latest to show widespread skepticism and opposition to the nation's continued legal immigration levels — whereby about 1.2 million foreign nationals are admitted annually — amid mass unemployment of about 22 million Americans.
An Ipsos Poll released this week found that nearly eight-in-ten Americans want a full pause on immigration to the U.S. — a policy that would come after four decades of mass immigration.
Since 1980 — 15 years after former President Lyndon B. Johnson expanded immigration — the U.S. has not admitted fewer than 525,000 legal immigrants in a single year. For 40 years, annual legal immigration admissions have hovered around one million.
The U.S., at current legal immigration levels, imports more foreign nationals than any other country in the world and has done so for more than two decades.
Trump's authority over immigration, like all other presidents, is vast and broad.
In June 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the president's control over legal immigration. In Trump v. Hawaii, the court stated that presidents have extraordinarily broad discretion to admit or exclude foreign nationals from the U.S. when they believe doing so is in the national interest.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Reader Comments
An interesting take on immigration I received at a business lunch in Buenos Aires. One of my colleagues, from Chile, leans over to me and out of the blue says, "Do you know why your country has such a problem with immigrants? Because we export al lthe criminals to your country" (and then he laughs hysterically). What he basically told me was that most people love their country and don't want to leave; it is just the illiterate unwashed criminal elements who can't make it where they live, who move to Amerika. The ones that can't afford to immigrate legally.
Since literally all of my closest personal friends live in Latin America, and I love and respect them and their culture, I'm going to call my Chilean friend's assessment accurate. Especially because every one of my southern friends makes 4-10 times my income, and live great lives. Why would they ever want to leave there for here? So perhaps our struggle with iillegal (undocumented) immigration is because we are importing the rejects of other societies?
BTW, the paperwork for me to immigrate legally is kicking my ass already, and I know what I am putting together is more simple than what it takes to legally immigrate to the US of A. If I can't pull together the paperwork, I may just take a page from the illegal immigrant handbook, and overstay my vacation
I know. I saw Scarface.
This UN organization conducts "roundtable workshops" in local communities throughout the US of A and 40+ other countries, where techniques are used to "force" an impression of consensus through voting by random people invited to these meetings as "members of the community" over sustainability "choices." They basically have about 10 cookie cutter templates for redesigning "walkable" smart cities, and when they descend upon innocent communities, they say "Your life will change. We all need to conserve resources. But you can create your own plan for how your community suffers." The people at meetings don't even realize they are being "led" to "create" these local plans based on matching their needs with one of those 10 templates. I forgot the term for how meetings are conducted to steer participants towards a predetermined outcome, which is ironic since I teach business communication at university and the term is in the textbook I use (too lazy to pull from bookshelf rn).
But the point: At a local meeting in California which Gary filmed, led by a diverse team of facilitators, one of the participants asked "Who are the marginalized minorities these plans keep referring to?" Answer was that the legal definition of minority includes a list of racial/ethnic groups (hispanic, black, asian, etc.). The person then asks, "If my local community is 98% hispanic, why is it that we have to fund programs to help everyone except the 2% white minority?" Answer: the legal definition of minority includes hispanics, blacks, asians, etc.
White people will NEVER be a minority, anywhere, because the definition of minority apparently is tied to skin color instead of percent of a population.
Splitting hairs?
“Yes but... that was different”.
Forget the ‘but’ and stick with ‘Yes’ - what came after the but is just an excuse.
Maybe you could come and walk in my shoes for a month....I guarantee you would not feel the same as you do today...
Anna1, BBub's got the winning point. Life is cruel; always has been / will be. And it goes back through history. After all, the Six Nations took over from the Clovis people, and I doubt that the latter enjoyed it.(C.f., the Amerindians killing off of the Red Haired Giants.) Now MAYBE those RHG has the better 'morality' what with cannibalism and what not, but we're left with what was (REASONABLY) fairly dealt.
Meanwhile, what's happened to America in my lifetime is nada but a sub rosa & intentional destruction of the one country that might have become (more than any other) this poor earth's true freedom leader, but for those same malefactors.
I'd say the whole thing is a matter of perspective and how deep you look. Fair is relative. Karma is a bitch. Actions of misc. empires/nations throughout time have consequences for centuries to come. Universe balances things out one way or another.
I've been spending a lot of time in South america with mestizo medicine women and men (okay, outing my own profession here, academia), and have learned so much about their culture, ways, history, etc.
Mestizo shamans are a perfect bridges between the peoples of the eagle and condor /the ancestral ways, because they themselves embody the conquered (indigenous) and the conqueror (espana).
The pre-Colombian history of south america remains accessible. Look up ingapirca. It is the only place where sun and moon worshippers shared a ceremonial site. First the canari built their moon temple, and then later, the incan empire conquered most of gran colombia - but at ingapirca, they built their sun temple, and SHARED THE SITE with the canari peoples. Only example (in Ecuador) of this occurring in south america. Now, at ingapirca, beyond the temple "grounds," there is a small incan trail/staircase, and if you climb that and at the edge of the cliff, carefully turn around, you will see a HUGE GIANT woman in the stone. This could NOT have been carved (the MSM version of story) because there is NO WAY TO access the cliff face, or even "leverage" yourself over the cliff edge. We are talking enormous cliffs. She is PART of the mountain (literally calcified and ossified), but her features are SO incredibly detailed, you can even see how beautiful she was. Literally not something you "might see" in rock, but a beautiful woman giant guardian. She is also "accompanied" by two other giants, but they have become eroded over time.
Or
Did the ancients understand the art of creating, growing and carving stone?
Or
Was she a giant, turned to stone?
There are bones of these skeletons in the
From a more spiritual perspective, I would say that I have experienced enough to suggest that (somewhere in cosmos), everything that IS possible, already exists. From that starting point, I have begun to notice the microworld around me with much more fascination, and when you see all the life around us under a microscope, you'll see more than you've ever personally imagined, right there. Some fabulous pictures of this online too! I stumbled across a beautiful, magnificent really, caterpillar the other day, in the forest. Have several amazing photos that show how the spikes (at regular intervals) loook just like the antlers of deers. They are stark white, in high contrast with the green and other colored features. The details of its face is also amazing. So I guess to answer more, I have a confidence that life is created. Over and over again. I've sort of seen it happening, where our grandmother's divinity is infused in every blade of grass. So I think giants were created (and may have built some of our most historic archiecture). Much fossil evidence exists of a race that began VERY tall (potentially 100 feet?), and which gradually shrank over eons (with most of them being immersed in the historic flood post-glaciation that every culture in the world has stories about). I think that is why the giantess I saw was calcified, actually. Post-flood, the giants that remained were far smaller. Even two hundred years ago, people settling the US land found so much evidence of 10 foot (red haired) giants from mounds that the smithsonian had to buy them all and hide them in their vaults (or pitch them in the sea, which was literally reported in newspapers of that time!) to hide the evidence. If you look at the pseudepigrapha and other non-canonical old testment literature, giants are said to be the result of sex between fallen angels (divine beings while in physical form?), and women. The women were said to invariably die during childbirth. The fallen angels are also said to have, in babylon, taught human women the use of makeup Apparently rules existed making human/divine sex forbidden, because this union resulted in hideous offspring, but the human women were just SO DAMN HOT that the fallen angels got carried away Some giants were manageable as long as villages kept them fed, but would quickly turn on and eat villagers when hungry. I don't really have a strong opinion on HOW giants were created, naturally, but just sharing some of major ideas around in the wild.
Came across this in reading Poe two? days ago. I wondered how long it would take to use.
I meant to post the new comment below as a reply but typed in the new comment box.
On another note....
You wrote:
I agree, though not all the cards from the deck need to be played in every game.