This piece, Immigration Then and Now, looks at how America’s immigration landscape has changed from earlier generations to today, and why those shifts matter for current debates. It compares the expectations placed on past arrivals with the incentives shaping modern policy. The goal is simply to give readers a clearer sense of what changed and how we got here.
2 Likes
Again I will quote a section of your article (all of which I reckon is accurate):
At the societal level, the ethical damage is profound. When the very first act of entering the United States is illegal, it sets a precedent of disregard for law and order. This is not strong footing for a cohesive society. A nation built on shared respect for its institutions cannot thrive when millions begin their American story by breaking its laws and flying a foreign flag. The erosion of ethics at the point of entry ripples outward, weakening trust, undermining assimilation, and corroding the civic fabric that holds the republic together. In the end, this erosion tears at the very definition of nationhood itself, erasing the shared bonds and common purpose that distinguish a people from a mere population.
I need to address the tired objection I constantly hear from the left—’We are all immigrants,’ they say. The insinuation is that it is hypocritical to deny anyone unfettered entry to the United States, since our ancestors themselves arrived from elsewhere. But this misses the essential point: the conditions of arrival and the intent behind immigration matter greatly. Not all who come share the same purpose, and the differences in motive shape whether immigration strengthens or weakens the nation. Immigration must therefore be understood in categories:
• Settlers: Those who come to build, bond, and contribute. They strengthen the nation.
• Conquerors: Those who arrive with ideological or political agendas, seeking to reshape America into the failed models they fled.
• Freeloaders: Those motivated primarily by welfare access—food, shelter, education—without intent to contribute.
The left’s refrain ignores these distinctions, in addition to the legal vs. illegal distinction. The Founders and early generations were settlers into a loosely organized wild frontier, not conquerors or freeloaders. They came not to subjugate but to build—nation builders who established communities, laid down law and order, and invested sweat equity into a civic fabric that could endure. Deliberately abandoning certain Christian mandates and repressive government, they created a constitutional republic grounded in liberty, not theocracy; opportunity, not dogma.
2 Likes
Yes, the left has a definite ideological and political agenda to weaponize open borders and illegal immigration to keep themselves in power.
They cannot be allowed to succeed in stopping the mass deportations by swaying public opinion with their astroturfed agitprop against it, and Trump.
3 Likes