The American Immigrant Experience. And A Question of Immigrants

I find myself reflecting on my background and beliefs more and more as I witness the changes in my nation America. Yes, my nation even though none of my grandparents were born here. Sure the nation existed before they came and for sure there are those who can claim their heritage back to the earliest settlers but I’ve never doubted this nation belonged to me as much as it belonged to any other even though I’m descended from recent immigrants.

The first ten years of my life I lived in government owned housing. In other words my life style was subsidized in part by the government something we often forget in our diatribes against the government helping others. My father held government jobs all his life from teacher to police officer to probation officer. My mother worked as a public school  teacher prior to being forced to give up her job because she was expecting a child. In her days women were not allowed to teach if they were married so she hid her marriage from the school authorities until she could no longer do it.

Most of the families that lived in my courtyard were Irish. The names were Gaughan, O’Neil, Clifford, Coughlin,Murphy. Mixed in we’re Italian: Niosi,  Lebanese:Thomas, English: Julian, Pitts, Scottish: MacElaney and others. The children in these families also being aided by the government and also believed they too were as American as any other even though most of their parents or grandparents were immigrants.

At age ten I moved into a single family house my folks purchased in a neighboring community again into a mainly Irish neighborhood of three.deckers where my youthful friends came from even more diverse backgrounds: Italian, Polish, English, Lithuanian, German, Swedish, Ukrainian. Again most were first or second generation immigrants. Here too we had no doubt we were all Americans.

It was from these neighborhoods that America drew it soldiers and workers. It was from these neighborhoods the Democratic Party drew its votes. These were the new arrivals to the land – people who had left other lands for a better life in America – those other lands not offering the opportunity or safety to these folks that they believed available in America. Their former lands were never denegrated nor were they for wanting to better themselves.

America allowed them to come. America gave them the opportunity to live free, have employment, have a place over their heads to shelter in, and feed and raise families. We took it for granted that is what America was about. It opened its arms to those who had little and beckoned them to come. It did not examine their wallets or education.

Not only did we believe we were true Americans – we used no hyphens in describing ourselves – we also accepted that we could freely practice our religion. And we did openly and proudly. Most were Catholic. At times we had religious processions on the public streets and an almost daily occurrence in my second neighbor was a flock of nuns in sets of twos walking from the convent to the church. Since the street was our playground we resented the interruptions in our games as we dutifully stood saying, “good afternoon sister.”

It was a good life in America. Why shouldn’t it be. It was our country and we were free. Oh, yes, we were also white. We had no blacks kids in our neighborhood. Nor were there Hispanics or Asians kids. There was a  Chinese laundry. Also, there were no Jewish kids. The Mom and Pop stores and drug stores were owned by Jews but they lived elsewhere.

Fortunate indeed were we. Now there are many of us who want to deprive others of our experience in becoming Americans. We want to change the country from the one that smiled on us into a frowning, grouchy land. We use the very same excuses others tried to use against us that the people are poor, they don’t believe like us, and don’t look like us.

We were given much. To whom much is given, according to what I was taught, much is expected. Is it too much for us to accord to others what was accorded to us?

 

30 thoughts on “The American Immigrant Experience. And A Question of Immigrants

  1. Matt, your view of your experience is from a very low perch. What you see is a hen yard with few different breeds of chickens. If you would hop a little higher you would see ducks, goats, cows, et cetera. Hop even higher and you would see the forest with deer, coyotes, wolves, bears with hawks , owls and eagles overhead. The mixture you saw was near entirely Christian and European.

    Note, that the Jew lived not among you. That was his choice and his eternal rejection of you and yours. It is his evolutionary strategy. It has served him well.

    Your experience was of different tribes, but the tribes were closely related. They shared fifty or a hundred thousand years of experience in cold Northern climates and the evolution that such an experience enacts. It is reflected in the family structure, community organization, and physical, intellectual, and emotional characteristics. Darwin was right – it is part of God’s plan that mankind be diverse. You experienced but a small corner of the planet to which all were expelled from the Garden of Eden.

    There are differences that are measurable and real that cannot bridged in the few generations that today’s laws affect. These disparities are clustered around Race. The Chinese and Japanese settle in most easily with us as their geographic and climate experience most closely aligns with that of the Europeans you lived with. The further South one goes the differences increase. The possibility of assimilation grows harder and differences grow greater until you reach the Bushman and the Australian aborigine. At this point any sort of cultural equilibrium would take tens of thousands of years.

    It is insane and cruel to inflict upon society of all races the chaos, violence and bloodletting that would occur by attempting to force cohabitation of the more disparate varieties of humanity. You are free to give away your own house. You are deficient in filial piety to tolerate or cheer the desecration of the graves and heritage of your ancestors. But that folly and that moral crime pale in comparison to the monstrosity of condemning your progeny to anarchy and strife for uncounted generations.

    America was cursed at its inception with Negro slavery, though is was largely discarding White slavery at that moment. The Founding Fathers fully understood and bitterly regretted this. They knew full well the that the evolutionary differences were insurmountable, that the two races could never live in perfect harmony with matched lives. The hand of history weighs all men down. There are things we cannot change though Nature may change them over eons that we are unable to direct.

    For all practical purposes the differences between the Races are immutable. We do not plan for 100,000 years. That is the province of God. It is impudence to reach that high. It is savagery to attempt to impose it on others.

    Example: the desegregation of schools. Essentially it is the mixture of two races, the Caucasian and the Negro. There are two basic problems that are disruptive and damaging to both races. Probably a trillion dollars has been spent in the last half century pretending that there is a fundamental equality between them. It is a total failure. A waste of money and lives.

    There is an irreducible average IQ difference between the two groups of about 15 points. This, then, requires either the lowering of the potential of the White student or the demanding of the Negro scholar a standard that cannot be attained. Both are badly damaged by the compromises. Additionally there is the behavioral problems associated with sexual maturation. The Negro matures faster by about two years. This leads to disciplinary chaos and group rivalry that makes learning hard to inculcate. Neither group can reach its full potential. Both are shortchanged. Both would benefit from a degree of being apart, of the sort that allows the Jew to remain a Jew.

    Matt, you have a dreamy ideas of equality and an irenic time on this Earth. Those hopes are what there is a heaven for. But our sojourn on this Earth has nothing to do with the eternity our souls are destined to enjoy. Here we have to accept diversity and its consequences.

    Your pursuit of a smattering of words held to rigid and misunderstood definitions thereof will lead to a land awash with innocent blood. Man is a warlike animal. All forms of life, animal and plant, wage battles, often to the point of extermination, against its closest fellows. The American bluebird loses to an English import. In England the red squirrel retreats against the North American grey. We are in competition all our lives on multiple levels. Your airy fairy nonsense is ill-fated, dangerous to the well being of all – those you abandon and those you would succor. Your proclaimed good intentions looked like clipped coins when paired with the tawdry political advantages they are joined to. The Democrat party denies Whites have interests while sanctifying the interests of all others. It preaches hatred of Whites. It cannot end well.

    Earth is a diverse, opportunistic place. Life is a struggle. Loyalty is a virtue. You deny them all for a bowl of verbal porridge.

    1. Wa-llahi! Thanks, Tad. Now, we understand what Glorious Leader meant by “mud people,” and, “nigger nations.” You’re our “go to man” for racist thinking. Bravo alek. More on racial purity, please. Don’t forget about the Jews. Have you any learned thoughts about the Hebrew Race?

    2. Tadzio:

      What century are you living in? You just made a usual 19th century argument that justified slavery, miscegenation and Jim Crow laws. Lots of people were measuing heads to prove White superiority.

      Your cold clime hot clime arguments seem a little off. Weren’t the Jews from the Middle East which is in northern Africa. And did you forget much is Asia including India are from the southern areas that are more southerly than Northern Africa.

      I don’t buy what you’re selling since most has been discredited.

    3. Nazi-tad at his best. Did you just try to argue furthering diversity in the USA will result in a race war? Brown v. Board of Education has been the law of the land for over 60 years…without a race war.

    4. “America was cursed at its inception with Negro slavery, though is was largely discarding White slavery at that moment. The Founding Fathers fully understood and bitterly regretted this. They knew full well the that the evolutionary differences were insurmountable, that the two races could never live in perfect harmony with matched lives. The hand of history weighs all men down. There are things we cannot change though Nature may change them over eons that we are unable to direct.”

      You have made a point and then completely missed it. Why did so many Black Americans go to Europe in the 20th Century?

      The Founding Fathers regretted slavery because men and women were being kept in chains and whipped to death. It has nothing to do with evolutionary differences. I’m not calling you ignorant as in stupid or moronic. I’m calling you ignorant because you are missing facts and as someone pointed out, you like the taste of Kool Aid. Even smart men like you (not patronizing, either) believe wrong facts. Blacks in this country and Whites will never get along because Blacks started out in chains. That cannot be removed from their history. And yes, they should move on, but its not an easy task. (I and my brother were pilloried because we both bought VW Rabbits. Members of the JDL threatened me because, “The Nazis still get the money!” They were good cars. That’s all I had in mind. And my uncle that served on the DE USS Oakland in The Pacific during WWII wouldn’t let his family even consider purchasing a Japanese car. )

      So back to Europe. The number of Blacks that settled in France, Germany, and the Scandinavian countries did so because there was life without lynching, to make it as simple as possible, in those European countries. Here there was lynching. Can’t get any simpler than that.

      Read Stephen Jay Gould’s The Mismeasure Of Man. I hope you do and it helps start removing some of the scientific racism that you believe. And if The Founding Fathers really believed that the evolutionary differences between Whites and Blacks were insurmountable, they were ignorant, too. And they were not.

  2. Are all immigrants good? Should we have open borders? Albert DiSalvo, the Martoranos, the Flemmis, Spike O’Toole and Pat Nee were all from immigrant families. The Muslim terrorists who killed thousands of Americans were non citizens. Do we want these kind of people in our country? Limits are needed, screening is needed. We have taken in over 30 million legals in the last 50 years plus another 15 million illegals. How much is too much? Lets assimilate, absorb and acculturate the legal ones. Lets not reward law breakers. 2. Flynn was the victim of a plot by the deep state. The target of the plot was Trump. The criminals in the deep state were going to squeeze him to implicate Trump in wrongdoing . The same tactic was used against Connolly. Their target was Sen. Bulger. Connolly was to be squeezed into implicating Bulger. Dershowitz even posted a letter calling for Connolly to be forced to testify against the deep state target. Identical tactics were used. 3. Why do you denounce Flynn for selling peaceful nuclear power to the Saudis? G E has been selling nuclear power to many countries over the last several decades. Should Russia be barred from international commerce? They gave $140 million to the Clinton foundation. Doesn’t that demonstrate good will? Should American companies be denounced for selling arms to the Saudis? Is Raytheon on that list?

    1. NC:

      You are on to the “Deep State” foolishness. Are those people bad immigrants? Who are they? I’m wondering.

      You suggest we only allow good Immigrants in. You tell how we have 45 million immigrants over the past 50 years. You then name six people who are bad. What Musilm immigrants have killed thousands of Americans? You do know we have excellent screening techniques. Imagine how your arguments could have been used against your ancestors.

      Flynn was involved with Russia in undermining America.You don’t seriously think the only charge they had against him was lying to an FBI officer? If that was it he would not have pled. Let Mueller do his work and see the truth.

      Perhaps you can tell us who the Deep State people were who went after Connolly. Never heard you use that term back then. So who are the members of the DS.

      Flynn was dealing with Russian companies that we’re being sanctioned by the US. He was trying to get the sanctions lifted so he could make big money knowing these countries we’re sanctioned because the committed crines in US. Remember he tweeted ten minutes after Trump sworn in that he and others were going to make big bucks. I suppose the deep State made him do it.

  3. The Deep State that went after John Connolly and Bill Bulger included federal prosecutors Stern, Durham, Wyshak, et al, and their henchmen, their co-henchmen on the State Police (5 State Cops at Connolly’s MIami trial) their colleagues in other departments of justice, the judges, federal and state who bought into the jihad, the co-conspiring members of the press, the media, the Boston Globe etc, and their allies in Academia most notably, Alan Dershowitz and his colleagues and allies. There’s your Deep State and it is only the tip of the iceberg.

    I’ve written about it extensively in several books and numerous essays.

    I’ve seen it at work in the St. Pat’s Parade case. We’ve written about that, too.

    Emile Zola saw it at work in his society, too, with the Dreyfus Case.

    2. You write: “What Musilm immigrants have killed thousands of Americans?” Have you forgotten 9-11?

    3. NO ONE I KNOW IS OPPOSED TO IMMIGRANTS: FOLKS I FOLLOW OPPOSE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AND WANT TO FIX OUR IMMIGRATION POLICIES AND REPAIR HOLES IN OUR OPEN BORDERS.

    4. IT WASN’T THE GOVERNMENT THAT ESTABLISHED THE HOUSING PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY . . . IT WAS THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER . . . IN AMERICA, THE GOVERNMENT WORKS FOR WE THE PEOPLE . . . YOUR DEBT IS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, NOT TO BIG GOVERNMENT, TO THE FOUNDING FATHERS NOT TO ORWELLIAN “BIG BROTHER.”

    4. LIBERALS ALWAYS BOAST ABOUT WHAT BIG GOVERNMENT DOES FOR US; CONSERVATIVES AND LIBERTARIANS BELIEVE THAT WHICH GOVERNS LEAST GOVERNS BEST . . . MANY OF FDR’S PROGRAMS WERE HELPFUL, THANK CONGRESS AND THE TAXPAYER . . .MANY LED TO THE INVIDIOUS “WELFARE STATE” AND PERPETUAL DEPENDENCY

    5. MOST FAMILIES LIVED IN PUBLIC HOUSING FOR A FEW YEARS UNTIL THEY COULD GET ON THEIR FEET . . . IT WAS A WAY STATION . . . NOT PERPETUAL PURGATORY

    6. Tadzio’s theories are atavastic: I think about Thomas Sowell, Martin Luther King and Art Tatum; I think about a chapter in my book Shots Heard Round the World: The chapter’s title: “The Triumph of Multi-ethnic America.” I advise all to read Thomas Sowell’s Ethnic America . . . we are one species, Homo Sapiens, we are all created equal, multi=potential, multi-talented, with inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

    I want all to reflect that anthropologically we Homo sapiens sapiens, Modern Human Beings, have all come out of Africa . . .it is our forebears’ first homeland.

    1. William:

      Those behind 9/11 were Muslims They we’re not immigrants.

      Your definition of the Deep State is people in government positions doing things you don’t like. I don’t think that’s what other people believe it is.

      If course the government establised housing projects, The taxpayer funded them but the Gvt decided to do them to help people.

      You object to big government a term as nebulous as dark state. Big government gave us the GI Bill. Did you object to that?

      Sure people lived in public housing for a short time. But it was still the government that helped during their need.

      The bottom line is you don’t think people coming here should get the help other immigrants received. You differentiate between legal and illegal.

      What about the kids who came here very young and have lived here for a decade of more only knowing this country. How are they illegal when they had no choice? Shouldn’t they be allowed to stay. They were too young to be criminally responsible and therefore not illegal. What about people vwo came here and overstayed their permission and have been here as good productive citizens and raised families here. Should they be deposited in a land they barely know.

      It is sad people forget their heritage and how much their own family depended on and worked for the government.

      1. Matt: I support William M. Connolly’s ideas: The American People . . We the People gave us the G.I. Bill

        Our government is good because our Founding Fathers made it good

        When the FEDs stray from the Founding Fathers vision Government becomes oppressive and corrupt . . .that is what William, Anna, Ms. Lee and others have been saying on blogs like this for year

        It’s WE THE PEOPLE

        Otherwise, you and other posters raise some good points, although I disagree with some.

  4. The phrase “deep state” may be new, but the concept of a corrupt government, corrupt justice department, corrupt judges, corrupt investigators framing innocent people, corrupt government lawyers/judges framing and bankrupting innocent folks as was done in the St. Pat’s Parade case, is NOT NEW . . .it goes back to Stalin’s time, to Cromwell’s time, to Nero’s time . . .Big State run amok . . . .Big Government crushing folks’ rights . . .
    “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do and say nothing.”
    and see C.P. Taylor’s play, “Good”.

    I saw the corrupt Deep State at work in the persecution of Raymond Donovan and the Duke Lacrosse Players and more recently in the federal persecution/prosecution of Boston-area Probation Officers.

  5. I’m not sure why all of a sudden there is all this fainting and swooning and crying and pouting and hand-wringing over illegal immigrants.

    Well, yes I’m sure – Democrats are looking for voters, and they are looking to pile on voters as quickly as possible, citizenship be damned.

    And today, we don’t have liberals – we just have panderers who seek to preserve their status in a nanny state. Prime example is Maxine Waters, who somehow wound up with a several million dollar “house” while pretending to represent constituents in California.

    George Will makes the point in this opinion piece:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/theres-nothing-more-depressing-than-a-cheerful-liberal/2018/01/17/aa2eacc4-faea-11e7-ad8c-ecbb62019393_story.html?utm_term=.c5cf0099bca8

    Plus – at one time, I was foolish enough to believe that Comey and those around him in the FBI were straight shooters. Boy, was I ever wrong!!!!!!!!

    There are plenty of examples of Deep State entrenched bureaucracy who believe they are above the law. Comey and his cohorts are just one example. The attempt to unseat Mulvaney at the CFPB by rightly rejected judicial means of another entrenched bureaucrat is yet another example.

    My favorite bad immigrant is Rocko, as played by Edward G. Robinson in the movie “Key Largo.” In answer to Humphrey Bogart’s question – what do you want, Rocko – the answer was given by Bogart himself – “more.” Rocko was finally rightly done in by Bogie on a boat originally headed for Cuba.

    1. Elmer,.It is not voters the Dems are looking for. It is the heart that America used to have when it came to dealing with people. It is back to the idea that everything cannot be measured by money. It is the thought that Russia should not be able to sow confusion in the USA.

      You are a smart guy. You can figure that out.

      1. I am a smart guy, Matt. And I have figured it out.

        It’s not Roosha that sowed confusion in the US – it’s spin doctors and media idiots, or midiots, for short.

        And by political demons like Billary Pandersuit and her cohorts attempting to sow confusion – “vast right wing conspiracy,” for example, and Bullets over Bosnia. She’s not the only one. John McClame and Linda Graham, or Linda Gomez, as he’s calling himself these days – see famous “s)))hole” meeting at the White House. And John Flake – his name says it all.

        Another example – Monica Lewinksy kvetching about noone apologizing to her for shaming her for acting like a humidor for White Trash Willie’s Cuban cigar, and for the – ummmm – blue dress.

        How could I forget White Trash Willie and Snakehead Carville as prime example of sowing confusion?

        America is a nation of laws, not men. Or at least it used to be, to a certain extent. The heart belongs to the people, not to the government, and the proper function of government is not to have heart, but to execute the proper functions of government.

        The rest people can figure out and implement for themselves, without Okra from Hollyweird telling us what to think, and without a guy like Obongo trying to get street creds by acting like he is the chief of all local city police.

        Pardon me, but I snorted into my morning coffee when I saw the assertion that Democrats are not looking for voters. The Box 13 episode by Lyndon Johnson in Texas when he ran against Coke Stevenson, who read books on the range under the stars and by campfire, when Johnson signed up dead voters to vote, is nothing compared to what Democrats are trying to do these days. Hence the joke about the little Mexican boy – “my daddy came back from the dead to vote, but he didn’t come to see me.”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_13_scandal

    2. Right on Elmer and Rock on . . . .it reminds me of the song, “With a rebel yell, they cried more, more, more . . .”but We the People are shouting “No More!”

  6. WOW!

    Welcome to the Blog Without Borders
    where restorative justice is our most
    important product

    The 3 young remote viewers were recently
    asked to remote Revelations from the Bible
    They scored a bulls eye……

    They were told nothing about the target
    just given random computer generated numbers
    They were never told what their results meant
    until now

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wilJ_Y5gPDk

  7. Yesteryears dangerous cabals (oppressive governments, deep states, anti-American movements) came from the rightists: Totalitarian Dictators like Tojo, Mussolini; movements like the No-Nothings, Red-Scare of the 1920s, McCarthyism of the 1950s, Neocons plus leftist interventionists combined to give us Iraq, Libya, Syria.

    TODAY’S DANGER TO DEMOCRACY IS THE LEFTIST CABAL: THE MAFIIA

    THE MAFIIA

    leftist Media
    leftist Academia
    leftist Feds (prosecutors, judges, corrupt/politically correct pols)
    leftist Internationalists (or Globalists, Open Border-types)
    leftist Imperialists (Clintonistas, Obamastas)
    leftist Amoral, Atheistic Antagonists . . .moral relativists, turncoats like Carr and Dershowitz who attack the left for 40 years (Bulger, Silber, Buckley, King) and now curry favor with President Trump.)

    Media, Academia, Feds, Internationalists, Imperialists, Atheistic Antagonists devoid of moral constrainst who use courts, agents, media, schools to intimidate, indoctrinate and alienate . . .who deprive us (innocent American citizens) of LIFE, LIBERTY and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

    Remember, you have been warned about the new Leftist Cabal: the MAFIIA

    Pay heed! Copy this and forward to all concerned and who are concerned about THE ENEMY WITHIN = the leftist cabal deep state otherwise known as the MAFIIA

    Read “Mac the Dog: The Story of How Madeline, Andy, Tiger and Mac changed the World.”

    Power to the people, to We the People, not to leftist government usurpers of power.

  8. These are the times that try men’s souls

    Speak now, or forever hold your peace

    As in the American Revolution, you must decide: Tory or Rebel or side-liner

    Today’s Tories are the Leftists . . .Big Government Politically Correct Intrusive Invasive Big Brother Investigatory Persecutory Imperialistic Internationalistic Atheistic Amoralistic

    Today’s Rebels are conservatives and libertarians with traditional values: Pro-Life; Pro-Family; Pro-Free Speech; Pro-Free Association; Anti-Big Government; Anti-Big Taxes (throw that tea in the harbor); Anti Excessive Regulation and Red Tape; Pro-Constitutionally Conservative restrained Judges; Against Activist Jurists; Against Political Correctness; and against the new Leftist Cabal = Big Gov’s MAFIIA . . . .the new Orwellian Big Brother . . .the black hole-deep state = MAFIIA

    leftist Media, Academia, Feds, Internationalists, Imperialistic Interventionists & Amoral Atheistic Antagonists. also known as the triple A = AAA, and so MAFIIA is sometimes spelled MAFIIAAA

  9. also MAFIIIAAA, the III = Internationalists, Interventionists, Imperialists,

    you know the old British Empire bit,
    Britannia rules the seas, aye wot? or Holland rules Indonesia, remember the Dutch East Indies . . .

    There are Insurrectionist Imperialists within the Deep State nowadays . . . we fail to detect and surgically excise them at out peril

    Woe to those and those of us who look but do not see!

  10. I am generally familiar with the history of immigration (notwithstanding the “Gangs of New York” movie) as follows:

    – pre-WW I immigration, when Europeans of all sorts came to the US because the streets were paved with gold and the plan was to make money and send it back to the old country

    – post-WW II immigration, when displaced persons were taken in by the US and other countries, under a UN program (the US wrongly sent many Ukrainians back to the USSR, wrongly labeling them as “Russians”: many killed themselves rather than being sent back to certain death anyway)

    – post 1950’s immigration, up to and including recent immigration

    – massive illegal immigration, ignored by DemocRats and Republicant’s, starting in the 1960’s, for gaining voters and cheap labor

    – a little subset of illegal immigration, created by former prez Obongo – DACA – because, you know, he had a pen; the program was adjudged to be unlawful/unconstitutional, but Obongo managed to lay his big stinky turd for everyone else to deal with and cry and whine over and virtue-signal over

    For a little bit more, here’s Ann Coulter:

    http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-01-17.html#read_more

  11. ugh ugh ugh

    http://stevehochstadt.blogspot.com/2018/01/dangerous-words-in-white-house.html

    Monday, January 15, 2018

    Dangerous Words in the White House

    It doesn’t bother me that Trump said the word “shithole”. I don’t know if my newspaper will print that word or sanitize it. Many media corporations are shifting their normal rules about what they say or print, because the President’s vulgar words are newsworthy.

    “Dirty words”, like the ones George Carlin spelled out in 1972, have one by one been moving inexorably into the popular culture. I’m still always surprised to hear the word “sucks” on TV.

    I was even more surprised to see one of the contestants on a prime-time quiz show on German TV, a man named H. P. Baxter, wearing a white T-shirt with big black letters spelling out “Who the FUCK is H.P. Baxxter?” playing on the name of a German musician. Nobody on air seemed to care.

    I’ve never liked self-appointed language police. I believe we should all be able to choose our own words to fully express our meanings.

    The meaning is what matters. Outraged focus on word choice can obscure the greater significance of meaning. That is happening with Trump’s “salty language”.

    What bothers me is Trump’s meaning, when he said he wanted more immigrants from Norway and fewer from Africa. Any white is better than any black immigrant. It is difficult to find a clearer expression of white supremacy than Trump’s words to a gathering of Senators in the Oval Office.

    I know some immigrants from Nigeria, Ghana and other black African nations, students I taught at Illinois College and their families. The students were sophisticated, multilingual, well educated and high achievers. They were a delight to have in the classroom. Some have stayed in the US in jobs or graduate school. None of them had lived in “huts”, as Trump characterized Nigerians in a June meeting.

    Certainly Trump is not the first racist in the White House. White supremacy was an American principle at the founding and throughout the 19th century. Even Lincoln, the only President that Trump will grant to have been more presidential than himself, did not believe in the full equality of the races. He said in his debates with Stephen Douglas, “I am not, nor have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races.”

    During the 20th century, presidential thinking and action have pushed away from racist policy and language, sometimes leading, sometimes following American society’s increasing rejection of white supremacy. The election of Barack Obama could have been a sign that our national government would never again express white supremacist ideology in practice or speech.

    But Donald Trump never accepted Obama’s election as legitimate. He led the most public fight to declare Obama an African and unworthy to be President. Racism in the guise of birtherism was Trump’s main political focus as he prepared his presidential campaign. He has never given up this idea.

    Maybe Trump’s word choice is too crude for public and official presidential business. There might be two sides to that question. There shouldn’t be any question about advocating white supremacy in the White House.

    Every elected representative of the American people, sworn to uphold the Constitution, should reject both Trump’s words and meanings. Of course, Trump denied using the words everybody heard him use. The most conservative Republicans at the Oval Office meeting pretended not to have heard them. Senators Tom Cotton (AR) and David Perdue (GA) said, “We do not recall the president saying these comments specifically.” No other Republicans who were there admitted publicly that Trump said those words, although Sen. Lindsay Graham told a fellow Senator about them.

    Pretending that there is nothing to talk about appeases white supremacy at the highest level of government. Supporting such racist talk is a step in the direction of promoting racist policy.

    Let’s not move backwards on racial equality, equal justice for all, support for diversity, and welcoming new Americans from all over the world. And let’s get that racist out of the White House.

    Steve Hochstadt
    Berlin, Germany

  12. Wa-llahi! You can’t, actually, see the Deep State, but, you can observe its’ effects. On the surface, the cases of Leonard Peltier, and, John Connolly, seem to have little in common, but, upon deeper reflection, one realizes that the forces that keep Peltier down, forever, are the same ones that have the last say in Connolly’s case. An invisible thumb on the scales of justice keeps both men in prison. That thumb is the best evidence of the existence of the Deep State

  13. https://www.thenation.com/article/what-is-the-deep-state/

    What Is the Deep State?
    Even if we assume the concept is valid, surely it’s not useful to think of the competing interests it represents as monolithic.

    FEBRUARY 17, 2017

    see link for full article

    “We see the government of God over the world is hidden,” Francis Bacon wrote in 1605, describing the deepest of deep states: the lord’s reign over us, which Bacon thought a good model for earthly rule. “Obscure and invisible” was how Bacon thought government worked best, and King James I agreed, instructing, in 1624, a too inquisitive subject that none shall “meddle with anything concerning our Government, or deep Matters of State.”
    Until recently, the phrase “deep state” had been mostly consigned to the bowels of the conspiratorial deep web, but over the past few weeks, since Donald Trump decided to take his fight with the intelligence community public, it has witnessed a remarkable florescence. The “deep state” apparently has Trump in its sights, at least according to former NSA intelligence analyst John Schindler, who tweeted that a friend in the “intelligence community” told him that Trump “will die in jail.”

    What is the “deep state”? The New York Times has given us an explainer on the concept, which doesn’t explain much. Things are bad, but not as bad as Turkey or Egypt, the Times says, which really do have deep states; and besides, leaks from the deep state will save us from the deep state.

    At least as long as there has been private property, there has been private plotting.
    If you do a search on a scholarly database, like Jstor, for the term, you’ll get lots of returns having to do with hypnosis, psychology, and spiritualism. This, in a way, is appropriate, since these activities have to do with the “obscure” interior life of individuals—that is, the opposite of collective categories such as the “public” and the “social,” realms that are presumed in modern democracies to be subject to procedural scrutiny and “freedom of information.”

    But what we call modernity didn’t just create the public realm subject to public law. It created the private sphere, centered on the ideal of the property-owning individual and private corporation, and which during our modern times have enshrined Bacon’s and King James I’s ideal. “Good luck researching a private firm,” writes the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. (Even the dogged Seymour Hersh didn’t have much luck when he tried to investigate “the private sector,” as opposed to his métier, the national security state: “The abuse of private power” proved “a much dicier subject for many editors even than the CIA.” Hersh gave up, and wrote his book on Henry Kissinger instead.)
    The problem with the phrase is that it’s used to suggest dishonorable individuals are subverting the virtuous state.
    So at least as long as there has been private property, there has been private plotting, and talk of a “deep state” has been a vernacular way of describing what political scientists like to call “civil society,” that is, any venue in which powerful individuals, either alone or collectively, might try to use the state to fulfill their private ambitions, to get richer and obtain more power. The first use of the exact phrase I managed to find is this: In 1817, John Fitzgerald Pennie’s “The Varangian, or Masonic Honor,” offered this dialogue of two servants working a large banquet hall filled with contriving earls and knights.

    Second servant: “Oh, could I but pry into these deep state secrets! I would give my very head to—

    Third servant: “Thus mayst, for aught ’tis worth.… Would I could pry into a venison pasty…. I will see what cheer the buttery yields.”

    Second servant: “Then art thou come in right good time: there’s glorious feasting here. But thou, dull fellow, hast no great regard for plots and state affairs.”

    Third servant: “No; but I have for the sad state of my deserted bowels.”
    Trump might not have control of the deep state, but he does preside over a very sad state.

    The problem with the phrase “deep state” is that it is used to suggest that dishonorable individuals are subverting the virtuous state for their private ambitions. A good Marxist, and even an intelligent liberal, however, knows that under capitalism, ambition is considered a virtue, not a vice, and that the whole point of government is to collectively organize subversion. What do you think the “pursuit of happiness” means? It’s this public virtue/private vice false opposition that makes so much of the “deep state” writing slide into, if not noxious Bilderberg anti-Semitism, then “we are a republic, not an empire” idiocy.

    But the concept resonates, especially since the modern state is not just an instrument to execute elite ambition but a site of popular demands and class struggle. The private, organized backlash to those demands and struggles is often understood as a “deep state” conspiracy, and that understanding is more often than not correct. The Koch brothers know this, at least according to Jane Mayer’s Dark Money. Kevin Ovenden tells me the term “deep state” was regularly used to discuss Turkish politics in the 1990s, especially the secretive power exercised by the military, bureaucracy, and courts against democratic action.

    “Conspiracy, one is tempted to say, is the poor person’s cognitive mapping in the postmodern age.” —Fredric Jameson
    Over the last few decades, with the concurrent rise of finance capitalism and the privatization of many facets of national security associated with what we call neoliberalism, “deep state” conspiracies have grown. Some of them are nutty and only add to the fetish, as described (three years before 9/11) by Fredric Jameson: “conspiracy, one is tempted to say, is the poor person’s cognitive mapping in the postmodern age; it is a degraded figure of the total logic of late capital, a desperate attempt to represent the latter’s system, whose failure is marked by its slippage into sheer theme and content.” Slippage between theme and content seems like a nice way of describing the hope held by many liberals that a CIA program of domestic destabilization will save us all from Donald Trump.

    By my count, the current usage of “deep state,” as it supposedly relates to Trump’s troubles, entails three overlapping understandings: The first has to do with war, militarism, and intelligence, the secret institutions that have deep roots but were fused together in a powerful way under the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama (Marc Ambinder’s book, Deep State, along with this recent essay in Foreign Policy, are good guides); the second with private corporate power, especially associated with finance, the arms trade, and fossil fuels; and the third with the many embedded bureaucrats of the US government’s many administrative agencies, who, we hope, are leading a passive resistance to Trump’s program of privatization and deregulation. “When the great lord passes the peasant bows deeply and silently farts”—and then tweets about it from a rogue NASA account.

    READY TO FIGHT BACK? SIGN UP FOR TAKE ACTION NOW

    There’s a fourth way the term is used, to refer to an almost hereditary covert caste, running from the men who in the early days of the Cold War set up the modern national security state to the elite who make up today’s “intelligence community.” In 1964, Random House published the bestselling The Invisible Government, by journalists David Wise and Thomas Ross (here’s the CIA’s declassified review of the book, which takes exception to its thesis). More recently, Michael Glennon’s National Security and Double Government updated the argument. Peter Dale Scott was the first, as far as I know, to use the phrase “parapolitics” and “deep politics” to discuss what is now described as the deep state, and he’s the author of numerous books on the dense connections between illegal drugs, covert action, and finance. I’ve always been a bit agnostic about Scott’s work, overwhelmed by the sheer detail, but then I remember that Iran-Contra really did happen. As Michael Parenti likes to point out, conspiracies do in fact exist, both in legal theory and in politics: Watergate, Iran-Contra, the savings and loan scandal of the 1980s/90s, “described by the Justice Department as ‘a thousand conspiracies of fraud, theft, and bribery,’ the greatest financial crime in history” (that we know of).

    Much of the writing frames the question as Trump versus the Deep State, but even if we take the “deep state” as a valid concept, surely it’s not useful to think of the competing interests it represents as monolithic, as David Martin in an e-mail suggests. Big Oil and Wall Street might want deregulation and an opening to Russia. The euphemistically titled “intelligence community” wants a ramped-up war footing. High-tech wants increased trade. Trump, who presents as pure id wrapped in ambition motived by appetite, wants it all—which makes him both potentially useful and inherently unstable, simultaneously a product and target of the deep state. In 1956, C. Wright Mills wrote that “the conception of the power elite and of its unity rests upon the corresponding developments and the coincidence of interests among economic, political, and military organizations.” If nothing else, the “Trump v. Deep State” framings show that unity is long gone

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *