As he is mourned we must also remember that Ted Kennedy was behind the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act. This revoked the 1924 Immigration Act. The 1924 Act largely excluded Jews and Italians. This was not racist. There was a lot of unrest at this time. Terrorism and strikes were widespread. There was truth in the perception that immigrants were behind many of these upsets. Quotas after the 1924 Act were keyed to the demographics of 1890. That is, if the nation was 70 % British in 1890, 70 % of the immigration slots went to British nationals. The 1924 Act recognized and targeted cultural differences. It was culturist.
Arguing for the 1965 Immigration Act, Ted Kennedy assured America, "First our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same. . . Secondly, the ethic mix of this country will not be upset." Kennedy was wrong on both counts. His law ended up completely remaking the cultural and ethnic make-up of our nation. Changing America's demographics was Kennedy's largest legacy by far.
In 1965 California led the nation in education. Now it lies near the bottom. Much of the school system focuses on remedial education. We also have a concern in that Saudi Arabia is cultivating radical Islamic populations on our soil. If a large terrorist attack comes from one of these centers, Kennedy will be to blame. Just as with Chappaquiddick, Kennedy never admitted he was wrong about his prized 1965 Act. Our ever increasing, diverse population boom is Kennedy's largest legacy by far.
Kennedy would have been the first to call this article racist. He, after all, took us from a regime that recognized the importance of culture to one forbidden to mention it. If you now say we do not like certain groups because they tend towards racism or polygamy or terrorism you are called racist. People should note that the 1924 Immigration Act only restricted white people, it was culturist, not racist. It recognized that cultural diversity was real.
Only when we recognize the importance of culture by adopting the word 'culturism' can we address the damage done by Ted Kennedy. Only then can we again ask for some level of assimilation and choose people based on our nation's needs and safety. Until then we must ignore truths, and smear those who mention them as racist. Until then we will not be able to address the damage done by Kennedy's legacy.
6 comments:
Culturist John,
You wrote,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kennedy would have been the first to call this article racist. He, after all, took us from a regime that recognized the importance of culture to one forbidden to mention it. If you now say we do not like certain groups because they tend towards racism or polygamy or terrorism you are called racist.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
And you think Kennedy did it single handily? I didn't real like him or his policies, but obviously, if the 1965 immigration act passed, and it did, it couldn't have been supported by Kennedy alone.
For one thing, just how instrumental was Kennedy's argument in passing the law?
From HERE
.
Kennedy introduced and was a strong supporter of the 1965 Hart-Celler Act – signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson – which dramatically changed U.S. immigration policy. "The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."
Kennedy asserted that the bill would end the favoring of Europeans for immigration into the United States. The 1965 legislation replaced the Immigration Act of 1924, which favored immigrants from northern and western Europe and Canada.[4] Proponents of the 1965 bill argued that immigration laws and quotas were discriminatory, and that American immigration policy should accept people not on the basis of their nationality. This also abolished the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Kennedy's bill was designed to reallocate visas to poorer countries and also added the stipulation that extended families of visa holders would also be eligible for visas. Although Kennedy promised the bill would not increase the number of immigrants into the United States or change the ethnic composition of the United States, immigration numbers doubled from 1965 to 1970 and then doubled again before 1990.
Well, maybe it didn't change the ethnic makeup of the private school Teddy sent his children to, but here in Dallas, a city Teddy has for some reason avoided his entire political career, the white student population in public schools has gone from 95% white to 5% white, since the immigration law was enacted. Not to mention that have the signs and radio stations are in a foreign language.
I guess the underlying logic of the law is that we, as a nation of free people, should not have the freedom to determine the future ethnic makeup of our society. Because we are inherently evil racists, that will always favor our kind....... you know, like every other culture on the planet does.
I wonder if our founders would have supported such a law? I wonder if their intent was for America to become unprecedented multi-cultural genetic experiment?
Somehow, based on their carefully chosen wording of our Constitution..... I dont think they would be on board with Kennedy's vision for America.
Of course he's dead now..... thank God..... nobody will ever remember how wrong he was on this and every other issue..... all that will matter is that he played his part in furthering the Leftist agenda.
I'm sure the good people of Massachusetts will find someone as equally destructive as him to finish the job.
All,
If you go to wikipedia and look up the 1965 Act, he gets more credit / blame than any other Senator. No one else has extensive quotes like him. JFK;s book on immigration probably influenced him to take up the charge.
RT, you make great culturist points. No, the ethic in the Act is globalist. No self determination need apply. It is a universalist ethic being pronounced. We must reflect the world and be blind to cultural diversity.
www.culturism.us
Of course the earlier law was discriminatory. But it was legitimate discrimination. Based on a reasobable belief that certain cultural attributes of immigrants would be better suited to assimilation and enrichment of the existing culture than others.
Anonymous,
Spoken like a true culturist!
Post a Comment