Do Nations Have the Right to Close Their Borders to Foreign Ethnicities?

Greetings,

I would like to discuss Professor Kevin MacDonald's article Immigration and the Unmentionable Question of Ethnic Interests. Nations like Japan, Israel, and China close their borders to people of foreign ethnicities because they believe in preserving their cultural and ethnic heritage. Do you find any value in this? Should the United States bomb these and other countries that don't allow for multiculturalism? Or should we respect the right of these nations to do as they wish?

Frank Salter wrote the book "On Genetic Interests: Family, Ethny, and Humanity in an Age of Mass Migration."

"Salter’s conclusion: the best way to preserve ethnic interests is to defend an ethnostate—a political unit that is explicitly intended to preserve the ethnic interests of its citizens. Promoting ethnostates is not only fair, it also serves the interests of most peoples. All existing nations are vulnerable to displacement by highly mobilized ethnic minorities, especially if the minorities have high fertility.

As Frank Salter argues, a far better solution is to acknowledge everyone’s right to live in a state dominated by their ethnic group.

This "universal nationalism" would allow people the right to live in an ethnostate that would protect their ethnic interests—and therefore, by extension, the genetic interests of the vast majority of the human race" http://www.vdare.com/misc/macdonald_041027_immigration.htm.

So, what are your thoughts?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I do agree that vast influx of immigrants is harmful to economy. That it is harmful to culture is questionable: everyone insists on practicing his own culture anyways; changes in culture are not bad but may be welcome. In the past, immigration was not that much opposed to and people moved around more freely. If you remember school years, you may recall that much of favorable changes in society were attributed to cultural diffusion and knowledge of other cultures was much revered back in history.

I also would like to point out that nationalism has been a great source of conflict for over a hundred years. I see how such desire to keep pure ethnicity can lead to ethnic cleansing.

Globalization, our favorite policy these days, does include migration from poorer countries to the richer ones. If we are for it, I don't see why we should oppose immigration.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course a nation should be free to let in or keep out whoever they want, just as a person should be free to keep out anyone they don't want in their house. The motivations, be they ethnic nationalism or whatever, don't matter. This would not, however, justify the ethnic cleansing of "undesirable" ethnic groups already in one's nation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A nation has the right to be exclusive, be it racial, ethnic, political, religious or whatever. That's what nations and borders are about. The United States is pilloried for not welcoming illegal Mexican immigrants with open arms, yet nobody complains about Japan.

 

I just find it odd that the U.S., a country founded by immigrants, made up of immigrants, would want to turn them away. But hey, times change, I guess. The U.S. now has a population high enough to be a nice-sized country so we no longer need the influx of people that continue to come in and settle.

I see and understand all the reasons for wanting to close our borders, but I'm still against doing so. The only way I would be somewhat for closing our borders was if all current illegal immigrants were granted citizenship.

- N

 

Employers of legal and employers of illegal immigrants will quietly make sure that America's borders do not get closed. Meanwhile the xenophobes and hurting American born workers will be encouraged think that liberals and immigrants are responsible for the open borders and they will be encouraged to channel their anger towards the anti-racist liberals and the immigrant communities.

 

interesting examples, but ....
I think you are mainly interested in how immigration will affect the US & its ethnic mix.

First, the Native Americans are probably saying to themselves, "now you tell us?", that as an ethnic group they would have been better off burning every European ship that came ashore, & killed everyone to "perserve their genes".

Second, I'm not sure how the US would look, if the original colonies had enforced an ethnic border, a country of only Brits, maybe only incompassing the original 13 States?

Third, lets say that every ethnic group took K. M.'s advise, would the US be managable? (Remember, not all euros would stick together, some being rightfully proud of "their" ancestors)

Fourth, remind me again, "how all those of African descent got here?"

Fifth, the pattern so far, has been the first wave of immigrants sticks together until they make it, then some of their kids start the process of "Heinz 57". Remember, Italians where here for almost a hundred years before they really made it, (de Niro, Guiliani, Scorsese, Lasorda, etc....)

Sixth, what's a Mexican/Chicano like me to think of all this nascent racism? Are we to assume, that its every "race for themselves"? group thought, group action? isn't that what got the germans in trouble last century?

Seventh, if all this talk is about having a "euro" America or even a "euro" Europe, then why don't euros have more kids, stick together, etc...? could it be, they are all part of this grand experiment called "America", the "West"? that is, or may be the future of this little planet, among the billion stars?

I myself, would think this a poor country, if all we had to eat was hagis & beer, if the only music to hear was brit pub songs, the only dances jigs, & the only beauties blonde, blue-eyed.

Oh, about Catherine Zeta-Jones, funny, she looks Mexican ;-)

http://www.absolutely.net/zetajones/

 

Alright, I know others have said the same, but I'll say it again. It's their country, what right do we have to invade/bomb them because they won't let foriegners enter? I mean, come on. Get real.

 

Every area of the earth that supports human life relatively easily has had the territorial control over it changed by force multiple times as various individuals, clans, groups and nations blindly jockey for advantages.

They can come and we can kill them or they can kill us, or we can negotiate terms. The earth does not care who lives in the house that you built upon the earth and from the earth without first asking the earth's permission. The Ten Commandments is one possible starting point in the negotiation of terms for the social contract. Jesus said we should interpret the Ten Commandments with the understanding that their purpose is to help us love god and our neighbors with all of our hearts and minds. Those folk who want to cross our border and join our society without our permission are our neighbors but those comfortable middle class people who are already here and want their children to grow up comfortable as well are also our neighbors. Excess immigration could turn a nation into a place with a small wealthy overclass and vast numbers of uncomfortable poor people.

 

Anyone should be allowed to live in any country they wish. No exceptions, no restrictions. I see it as a basic right.

 

First, they're not "Native" Americans - that term is incorrect and political in nature.

Second, the Nazis felt the same way: they had a high degree of sympathy for the Indians and felt they should have repelled the invaders. Are you a Nazi?

Immigrants of the same ethnic stock are a different question than immigrants of a different ethnic stock.

Also, the issue of immigration is an old one - even if all you saw was "Gangs of New York," you'd know this (and yes, there is a reason the Irish are seen as of different blood than the old English, the Germans, and Scandinavians/Dutch).

 

you're right, they are the "First Peoples" of the Western Hemisphere

4 points;
1) I doubt that the nazis ever, ever had any sympathy for the "First Peoples", except as an object lesson on why they needed to defend the "Fatherland". You'll have to post some 'links' on where you found that info

2) "nazi", is that the new tactic on trying to smear those that may or may not agree with you?

3) you may have not noticed the intent of my post, but its that if we all think in ethnocentric terms, the US (at least) will be ungovernable.

4) and if you havent noticed "Heinz 57" is the future

 

1. Any nation has the right to control who comes into that country upon any criteria they decide upon.
2. I do not believe they have the moral right to prevent anyone from leaving, unless they're personally criminals. This said, the UN has never made that practice illegal.
3. Different economies find different types of people useful. Also political conditions can change that usefulness. Any nation would be foolish to not control its own boarders to advance its own economic and political well being.


The US should put a priority on people that will make the US stronger economically and politically and exclude those that weaken it. This is just basic.

 

here is my take on it.


if a country like the usa desended mainly form white ero roots advance the world and make it a better place and limit there population size to have a better life.


then group be of poor minority group that bread like rats should take over the world by pure numbers alone? and when that group does not want to be considered amarican they still want to be called by there country formar name and refuse to learn the language?


with in 10 years whites will be the minorits in the states right now in the last 6 years my old school went form a 90% white demografic english speekers to 70% minority that dont speak english. They even tryed to convert the school to a non english speeking school.

 

Race is meaningless to me... i don't care if there are no white people in a hundred years... or any other race. What I care about is culture. Ideas are what matters. Let the blood take care of itself. I refuse to allow our ideas to be smothered by mediocrity.

 

Then how do you feel about Saudi's wanting to keep their culture "Western Free"? Isnt that what created an enemy outta Osama? It seems that America has little problems forcing it's culture on other societies does it?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The Saudis are causing problems with their oppression... however, they're not a general threat. We'll work around them until they're the minority.

It isn't about american culture, its about freedom.

If you see the two as the same thing, then so be it. We do not.

 

We have to address two seperate issues here:

1) Legal Immigration
2) Illegal Immigration

Americans for the most part have no problem with legal immigrants. This country was founded on LEGAL immigrants.

Its the ILLEGAL immigrants that we have problems with.

If you want to leave everything you have, come to this country, work your ass off, and PAY TAXES, then by all means come on over.

Either way our current policy is not working. Some parts of this country (See Los Angeles) are very soft on restricting illegal immigration.

If China doesnt want to let anyone in, thats their business.

 

Does a nation have a right to choose who enters its borders? Much of the American political world seems to think everyone has the right. Any politician who is opposed to illegal immigrants entering the country is accused as being "anti-immigrant", even though there is a tremendous difference. The vast, vast, majority of those in the United States believe that immigration over all is very healthy. They add to a the tax base, and provide a controlled population growth that is good for both the economy and the tax base. The problem comes, however, when a huge influx of poorly educated, foreign speaking immigrants enters the nation illegally.

Politicians like Congressman Luis Gonzalez of Illinois are attempting to give illegal immigrants the right to in state college tution, and even drivers licenses, and in some cases has already succeded. Any politician who believes this is a poor policy is immediately branded a racist and anti-immigrant. Gonzalez does not care about the nation's health, only about the political power he believes he achieves if he has a large hispanic populace backing him. His largest argument is that these immigrants fill jobs that Americans will not take.

Time has proven that theory completely wrong. As the American economy slowed down during the 21st century, the illegal immigration has not. The reason for the continued migration has more to do with immigration policy than economics. The problem is that efforts are concentrated at the southern border rather than in the United States itself. Businesses that hire illegals for ridiculously low wages are rarely penalized. If these companies are penalized with severe consequences on a regular basis, the job opportunities would quickly dry up, and so would the illegal immigration. Stop at any U.S. restaurant and you are sure to round up a few illegal workers.

The reality, however, is that politicians like Gonzalez and small businesses do not want to see a change, and have created an inconsitent American policy to keep these workers coming. Does a nation have a right to close its borders to the people that it does not want? If you believe in any concept of nation at all, of course the answer to that question is yes. A controlled, responsible immigration policy, however, is healthy for a nation and its economy. Japan will probably be forced to change its long standing policy in the future in order to survive economically.

The problem with immigration comes, however, when massive amount of migrants enter a nation at the same time, causing entire regions of foreign speaking people. The immigrants, in this situation, tend to cluster together and never adjust to their new environment, creating poor neighborhoods. The native born population then tends to create negative stereotypes and regards the changing demographics as a threat to their culture. This is not a healthy trend for any nation, and eventually causes a sense of dual nationalism and conflict.

"I just find it odd that the U.S., a country founded by immigrants, made up of immigrants, would want to turn them away", Neildo

They are taking in more immigrants than any point in the nations history. The majority are opposed to "illegal" immigration, not legal.

 

Now if we close our borders, what do you suppose we do with the ones currently living inside our borders illegally? Just ship them off, give them citizenship, or what?

- N