Wikipedia defines irredentism as:
…advocating annexation of territories administered by another state on the grounds of common ethnicity and/or prior historical possession, actual or alleged. It is a feature of identity politics and cultural and political geography. Since most borders have been moved and redrawn at one point, a great many countries could theoretically present irredentist claims to their neighbours.
That’s what Mark Krikorian thinks will happen if the Administration’s immigration proposals are enacted. He expects the massive, unintegrated Mexican underclass these initiatives will create to demand separate political status and make geographic claims:
It would create more of a constituency for the Aztlan irredentism that is already a normal part of political debate on the Left in California; more immediately, it would facilitate the Mexican government’s anti-assimilation initiatives designed to create a regime of shared Mexican-U.S. sovereignty over much of our population, with Mexico City serving, in effect, as a second federal government that local and state officials would be answerable to. And when we rouse ourselves to reassert our exclusive sovereignty, as the French state tried to do in the no-go zones of its immigrant suburbs, the pushback might well be as intense.
Maria Hsia Chang, Professor of Political Science, University of Nevada Reno, reinforces Krikorian’s argument that irredentism is an established political goal:
Mario Barrera, a faculty member of U.C. Berkeley’s Department of Ethnic Studies, admitted that multiculturalism “would help prepare the ideological climate for an eventual campaign for ethnic regional autonomy.” In January 1995, El Plan de Aztlan Conference at UC Riverside resolved that “We shall overcome…by the vote if possible and violence if necessary.” The rise of Mexican irredentism as a serious political movement “awaits only the demographic transformation of the Southwest.” As an article entitled “The Great Invasion: Mexico Recovers Its Own” in 1982’s Excelsior, Mexico’s leading daily newspaper, put it:
The territory lost in the 19th century by…Mexico…seems to be restoring itself through a humble people who go on settling various zones that once were ours on the old maps. Land, under any concept of possession, ends up in the hands of those who deserve it…. [The result of this migration is to return the land] to the jurisdiction of Mexico without the firing of a single shot.Multiculturalism and United States government’s immigration policy have contributed towards the rise of Chicano ethnic separatism within the American Southwest that has all the makings of an incipient Nation of Aztlan.
Would Congress or a Republican administration ever endorse irredentism? The White House and elements of congress already have. The disastrous Akaka Bill aims at creating a race-based, sovereign, territorially-endowed entity in Hawaii, and its precedent would threaten the mainland’s cohesiveness. That Akaka stands a real chance of being enacted is proof Americans need to get a two-handed grip on Washington before the White House and Congress wreck our nation.
Submit to Stumbled Upon!
Just as an experiment, we should give New Mexico, say, to the Mexican government and let them run it for a while. Most of the Anglos would leave immediately, but it wouldn’t be long before Latinos would be flooding into Colorado, Arizona, even California because of the “economic conditions” in New/Old Mexico. At least the point would be made that it ain’t not having enough land that keeps Mexico poor.
I vividly remember my Chicano studies teacher in college referring to the ’silent invasion’ of the American Southwest, her dreams of Aztlan, and the nascent goal of Hispanic militant goals to reconquer ‘Aztlan’, a fictional and delusional memory of a land and time that never actually existed - which they freely admit when asked.
That is the hardest part about our Congress’ inaction in defense of our southern border - they’ve known for years exactly what is at stake here, but choose to continue looking the other way as the invasion continues - and grows.
And it’ll turn into a 3rd world shithole like Mexico.
We have a great conservative congressman. He’s introduced legislation to build a wall at the Southern border and another bill to bring illegal immigration to a screeching halt. The latter has about 40 co-sponsors now.
I’ve been in touch with him, interviewed him at a Veteran’s Day ceremony, and now have a link up to the “TRUE Enforcement Act of 2005″ up for everyone to see. These are some laws with teeth.
Mr. President, “Build That Wall!”
I also used info from Heather McDonald’s expose in City Journal on the Mexican govt’s aggressive efforts to overwhelm us with illegals. Boy is she hopping! Illegals already send over 16 billion back to Mexico, but now they’re admitting they want “their” land back.
And a link to Cal Thomas’ column today getting behind the TRUE legislation…
Ever heard of the Island of Niihau? Here’s how they describe themselves:
Also, there are the Kamehameha Schools in Hawaii.
From their web site we have:
The Bishop Estate owns much of the land in the Islands and is very wealthy. Having lived in the Islands for over 3 years some time back (mid-90’s), I can tell you that there is rampant discrimination against non-Hawaiians in the islands - the main reason I left. The push has been and is fronted by these “ethnic” efforts but in reality the real effort is to restore the monarchy - which Hawaiians feel was overthrown by US forces. They do not want to be part of America - don’t let Akaka fool you.
And how is this not racist?
This is the best school system in Hawaii and is not available to non-Hawaiians.
“We have a great conservative congressman. He’s introduced legislation to build a wall at the Southern border and another bill to bring illegal immigration to a screeching halt. The latter has about 40 co-sponsors now.”
Not sure which one your congressman is, but we need more Tom Tancredos. We won’t get that wall from a Bush presidency. He’s been bought and paid for by open borders big business. The Rove big tent philosophy intends to welcome all the new, freshly amnestied and eternally grateful Mexican Republicans; who are really here for Reconquista.
The shift in paradigm by many republicans from what’s best for America and Americans to what’s best to further globalization and corporatism is exactly how Americans have little voice in government on this issue. The two parties are rolling the dice to see who is going to benefit from the windfall of new citizens; the dems promising them all the social benefits they can swallow or the republicans banking on their gratitude.
In truth it will be neither, as the southwest is swallowed up by a criminal element with loyalty only to that festering shithole that is our southern neighbor.
Imagine, it was only 5 years ago that I assumed that the Bush love affair with Vicente Fox was due in large part to Fox’s reputation as a consumate fellatist and had nothing whatsoever to do with the editorial board of the WSJ, campaign contributions or the Rove plan.
At any rate, a wall is only half the answer. Fat white republican businessmen finding their asses in handcuffs and being carted off to jail for employing illegals is the other half. If there are no jobs, much of Fox’s army will simply go back to Mexico.
Right, Lee, there are no Democrats arguing for letting illegal aliens stay here. What a crock. Just like all the French Muslims went back to Algeria when the jobs dried up. What Mexico needs is more globalization, more “corporatization”, that is, more capitalism. Or, to put it another way, more Republicanism. Why should Mexicans go back to Mexico when we give them welfare, school their children and treat their illnesses, which is a heck of a lot more than the hidalgos would do for them back in dear old Latino-land? Why do they even need jobs?
What a crock indeed. I did not say there were no dems arguing to keep them here, in fact I said just the opposite. There is a difference in France’s situation, in that France is paying the price for its centuries of colonial misadventures. France could do nothing to keep the Algerians out, as they were full French citizens.
Mexico, on the other hand, has the lion’s share of the country’s wealth tied up in the hands of a few families. Instead of investing in Mexico, they invest in Wall Street. Rampant corruption aside, there is no class mobility in Mexico. As long as ‘activists’ can influence the dems (and increasingly the republicans), and as long as republicans are up for sale to business interests, we will keep importing poverty from Mexico.
Just an FYI, but Mexican nationals cannot receive welfare benefits, except for the urchins they spawn in this country. Anchor babies is the next issue, after a fence and enforcing employment law, that needs to be addressed.
To be both fair and accurate, lee, you should add that as long as democrats are up for sale to labor interests. In point of fact, though, business buys both parties, nearly at will.
I thought the going price for dems, in this context, was a given Bill. Lieberman is a prime example. He’s one of the seminal forces that had the provisions of the Real ID act stripped out of the security bill that was recommended by that bogus 9/11 commission. While off topic, I think the love affair between La Raza and Gonzalez is mostly carrots and sticks. La Raza has their agenda, Gonzalez has…ummm Rove’s? La Raza is giving carrots to Bush for his immigration non-policy.
More OT. I drive up the I-5 through LA almost everyday. There’s a new bumper sticker that we’re seeing a lot of. It has a Mexican Flag at the top left, an outline of a guy in a sombrero in the center…with him taking a whiz on the American Flag in the lower right. The text says, “Aztlan y Mexico, Ahora para siempre”.