Post-American?
4. Most importantly, open borders are a bad idea because Americans aren't ready to abolish their country yet. The reason for expanding NAFTA beyond trade agreements into a regime of open borders is political consolidation � the dream of the European Union, after all, is to create a United States of Europe, with its own currency and army. A North American Union is the inescapable corollary of open borders � already, our new ambassador to Canada, former Massachusetts governor Paul Cellucci, is touting the need for common policies on energy, the environment and immigration policies as part of a "NAFTA-plus" arrangement.
The Wall Street Journal is at the forefront of this process. In Bartley's own words: "I think the nation-state is finished." This is not the anti-Americanism of the non-patriotic Left, but rather the post-Americanism of the non-patriotic Right. Post-Americans, like the leadership of the Journal, are not enemies of America; they have just "grown" beyond it.
The post-American trend is especially pronounced among the Journal''s corporate readership. During the previous immigration wave a century ago, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers encouraged their members to promote the Americanization of their employees, while Henry Ford established an English school for his employees, which taught immigrants as their very first English-language sentence, "I am a good American."
The contrast with today could not be more stark. In 1996, Ralph Nader, of all people, wrote to 100 large American corporations to ask that they open their shareholders' meetings with the Pledge of Allegiance. Of the half that responded, only one agreed that it was a good idea; the rest were indignant, saying that they were global companies, and calling the request "political and nationalistic" and reminiscent of the loyalty oaths of the McCarthy era.
An increasing number of corporate executives have been forthright enough to acknowledge their status as post-Americans and formally renounce their citizenship. Michael Dingman, a director of the Ford Motor Co., for instance, took Bahamian citizenship to avoid paying taxes; John (Ippy) Dorrance III, a Campbell Soup heir worth an estimated $2 billion, became an Irish citizen for the same reason. New names in this rogues' gallery are published every quarter in the Federal Register.
An open border with Mexico would move us rapidly toward the kind of world sought by Bartley and his newspaper. But it would be a calamity for those of us who still cherish the republic whose birthday we are celebrating this week, the nation to which our forebears pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.
Source: CIS
Who decided great wealth gives you the right to decide what this country should and should not be? Who decided that the haves get to change this country into something I want no part of. Who decided they should be allowed to live or do business here?
Not me!
Technorati Tags: illegal immigration, center for immigration studies, mark krikorian, I'm getting annoyed here
The Wall Street Journal is at the forefront of this process. In Bartley's own words: "I think the nation-state is finished." This is not the anti-Americanism of the non-patriotic Left, but rather the post-Americanism of the non-patriotic Right. Post-Americans, like the leadership of the Journal, are not enemies of America; they have just "grown" beyond it.
The post-American trend is especially pronounced among the Journal''s corporate readership. During the previous immigration wave a century ago, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers encouraged their members to promote the Americanization of their employees, while Henry Ford established an English school for his employees, which taught immigrants as their very first English-language sentence, "I am a good American."
The contrast with today could not be more stark. In 1996, Ralph Nader, of all people, wrote to 100 large American corporations to ask that they open their shareholders' meetings with the Pledge of Allegiance. Of the half that responded, only one agreed that it was a good idea; the rest were indignant, saying that they were global companies, and calling the request "political and nationalistic" and reminiscent of the loyalty oaths of the McCarthy era.
An increasing number of corporate executives have been forthright enough to acknowledge their status as post-Americans and formally renounce their citizenship. Michael Dingman, a director of the Ford Motor Co., for instance, took Bahamian citizenship to avoid paying taxes; John (Ippy) Dorrance III, a Campbell Soup heir worth an estimated $2 billion, became an Irish citizen for the same reason. New names in this rogues' gallery are published every quarter in the Federal Register.
An open border with Mexico would move us rapidly toward the kind of world sought by Bartley and his newspaper. But it would be a calamity for those of us who still cherish the republic whose birthday we are celebrating this week, the nation to which our forebears pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.
Source: CIS
Who decided great wealth gives you the right to decide what this country should and should not be? Who decided that the haves get to change this country into something I want no part of. Who decided they should be allowed to live or do business here?
Not me!
Technorati Tags: illegal immigration, center for immigration studies, mark krikorian, I'm getting annoyed here
posted by jakejacobsen @ 9:39 PM
<< Home