April 20, 2004
NOTE: PLEASE say if you DON'T want your name and/or email address published when sending VDARE email.
An Anonymous Californian writes:
I read an article published in the Opinion section of the Salinas Californian newspaper written by Roger Hernandez. His article is about the Sierra Club facing a takeover by anti-immigrant extremists. ["Sierra Club Breakdown: The Greening Of Xenophobia," by Roger Hernandez, April 10 2004.] He refers to VDARE.com as an anti-immigrant white supremacist website. Have you read this article? What's your response?
[Peter Brimelow replies: Our response is as follows: yawn. Notoriously, the modern definition of "racist" is "someone who is winning an argument with a liberal [libertarian/ neoconservative]." "White supremacist" is merely the version of the same smear that the entrenched Sierra Club staff apparently used in what, by a process akin to biblical scholarship, we deduce to have been a memo circulated to their Establishment media mouthpieces, who credulously reproduced it in tellingly similar pieces under their own bylines. (For yet another example, see "Sierra Club Showdown Reveals Immigration Rift," by Rick Montgomery, [email him] Kansas City Star, April 19, 2004.)
For, as Hernandez' silly flailing makes clear, the Sierra Old Guard has no rational defense against the Sierra insurgents' point: conservation in the U.S. requires ending population growth—which, because Americans have spontaneously stabilized their population, means ending immigration.
Absurdly, Hernandez concedes that ending immigration "might mean less overcrowding here"—but then claims that, because it would not prevent Mexican environmental degradation, immigration reduction does not "deserve the name 'environmental policy'…"
Of course, no American domestic policy can prevent Mexican environmental degradation. But the correct policy can prevent American environmental degradation, and should.
Moreover, the U.S. "ecological footprint" is much larger than the rest of the world. So stabilizing the American population has direct global implications.
Needless to say, Hernandez' real preoccupation is ethnic. As we have noted before, VDARE.COM is obviously not a "White Supremacist" site, if for no other reason than that it publishes non-whites. We do publish writers who could fairly be described as "white nationalists," in that they explicitly defend the interests of American whites—who, however, made up 90 percent of the populations in 1960, before the disaster of the 1965 Act. And we will continue to do so, because this point of view is at least as legitimate as black nationalism or Hispanic nationalism.
Hispanic nationalism is particularly relevant here. That's exactly what motivates Hernandez himself. He is an immigrant who has chosen to be a professional token Hispanic. His King Features webpage explicitly promotes his column as "an insightful perspective on the way Hispanics are changing America, and on the way America is changing Hispanics" and reports gleefully that Hispanics are increasing because of "High levels of immigration…"
No wonder he doesn't want a rational debate on immigration—or, as it should properly be termed, invasion.
No wonder he feels such affinity - he tells us in his column - for the yellow-bellied sapsucker. (Hernandez claims to be a bird-watcher, enabling him to insinuate that illegal immigrants are just like bird migrations. Nobody here but us yellow-bellied sapsuckers!)
Not for the first time, the driving force in the immigration debate turns out to be, not the immigration reformers' "racism"—but the immigration enthusiasts' treason.
[email Roger Hernandez.]