At the Intersection of Faith and Culture

At the Intersection of Faith and Culture


Amnesty: Racial Pandering Is Not the Way for GOP

posted by Jack Kerwick

Because Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to three million mostly Hispanic immigrants in 1986, Republicans feel all but compelled to grant amnesty to eleven million such immigrants in 2013. 

When asked why Republicans are more open to pursuing “a pathway to citizenship” today than they were just a few years back, John McCain offered a reply that is refreshing for its frankness: “Elections.  Elections.”  The Republican senator fromArizona, former presidential candidate, and long-time supporter of amnesty explained: “The Republican Party is losing the support of Hispanic citizens.”

Numerous polls have indicated that McCain’s assessment is flat out wrong, that “Hispanic citizens”—i.e. those Hispanics that are here legally—are about as opposed to illegal immigration as is the average American.  Such polls shouldn’t be necessary, though, to see that amnesty does not promise to be a winning ticket for the GOP. There is one simple fact that should make this plain:

The GOP remains chronically unpopular among Hispanics in spite of the fact that it was a Republican president that granted the one and only amnesty for Hispanic immigrants that this country has had.

But if it isn’t their resistance to amnesty, it may be asked, then why do Hispanics continue to vote overwhelmingly for Democrats?

To answer this question, we need to do something that few politicians from either party are willing to do: speak truthfully.  And the truth is this: the reason that Hispanics, along with blacks and Asians, vote in massive numbers for Democrats has everything to do with racial politics.

Everyone knows this.  Few people are willing to say it.

There aren’t many things in American politics capable of commanding a trans-racial consensus.  That the Democratic Party is the party of entitlements, though, is something that is recognized by Americans of all colors and creeds. And let’s face it: a growing number of Americans, of all races, find the offer of something for nothing irresistible.

Yet for non-whites, the Democrats’ lure is that much more powerful, for the Democratic Party is also universally recognized as the party of so-called “affirmative action,” of endless privileges and benefits for racial minorities.

The professional and monetary benefits to be had from voting Democrat are enough to attract many non-whites.  For others, however, the attraction runs more deeply than this. 

The Republican Party, both its leadership and its rank-and-file, consists primarily of whites.  In our new, multicultural America of which, as TIME magazine said, Barack Obama is both “symbol” and “author,” this alone is enough to render it suspect. But it also consists of whites who repeatedly talk about “personal responsibility,” “individualism,” “capitalism,” “the Founders,” “the Constitution,” “the Declaration of Independence,” etc.—words that, thanks to the tireless labors of race activists, are taken by many non-whites as “code” for racism.

There is no small number of non-whites who don’t so much vote for the Democratic Party as vote against “the racist” Republican Party.

Whether it is 1100 or 11 million Hispanic immigrants who are granted amnesty, it is this many voters who the Democrats can add to their base. Obviously, the Democrats know this, for if not, they would not be leaning on the Republicans to endorse it.  Just as Democrats do Republicans no good turn in telling them which candidates they should run for office, they do them no good turn in telling them that amnesty is the key for Republicans to win future elections!

But let’s play along here for a moment.  If Republicans want to expand their “outreach” efforts, maybe in addition to amnesty, they should consider doing some of the following.

First, they should voluntarily relinquish some of their seats in Congress and hand them over to the Hispanics, blacks, and Asians of their choosing. 

Second, they should become the most unapologetic apologists for socialism, affirmative action, Spanish as our first language, and the end of a “war on drugs” that has left a disproportionately large number of young black and Hispanic males incarcerated and dead. 

Third, they must forswear all talk of a “War on Terror” or “Islamism” or whatever they want to call it, for whatever name they assign to the belligerents upon whom they would have the U.S. military set its sights, those belligerents are non-white.  How can Republicans expect to win elections if they are seen by non-whites as the white party that wishes to go to war with non-whites?

The truth of the matter is that as long as there remains a Democrat Party that non-whites can call home, there will be nothing that Republicans can do to keep them from flocking to it.

A strategy other than racial pandering is in order. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Previous Posts

Losing the Language: How the GOP Undermines Itself--and Liberty
As the mid-term elections approach, it’s high time for Republican commentators to walk the walk. Just the other morning, Mark Steyn, busily promoting his new book, made an appearance on Bill Bennett’s radio program. The latter agreed enthusiastically with the former that in order for conserva

posted 10:16:04pm Oct. 23, 2014 | read full post »

Political Correctness and Ebola
That there is a sensationalistic dimension to the Ebola coverage is something of which I have no doubt. Sensationalizing events is what the media does best. There may even be a sense in which it can be said that sensationalism is intrinsic to mass media.  Sensationalism serves the interests of t

posted 10:26:30pm Oct. 16, 2014 | read full post »

Capital Punishment Revisited
For a discussion of capital punishment, with no thinker is there a better place to begin than Ernest van den Haag. It is with justice that the latter’s seminal analysis of this topic is a staple of textbooks in college ethics courses nationwide: the author addresses the thicket of issues that are

posted 9:11:40am Oct. 14, 2014 | read full post »

Abortion Reconsidered III
Dan Marquis contends that except in “rare cases,” abortion is immoral, and it is immoral, he further argues, because the fetus has a “FLO”—a “future like ours.” Before arguing that abortion is wrong, Marquis first attempts to show what makes killing in general wrong. Killing is wron

posted 6:30:13pm Oct. 12, 2014 | read full post »

The Left, Columbus, and Why This Day is Still Worth Celebrating
Few holidays are as “politically incorrect” as is the day that Americans reserve to commemorate the birthday of Christopher Columbus. Such is the ferocity of the smear campaign to which Columbus has been subjected for decades that he has been made into a villain among villains in the rogues’ g

posted 6:11:01pm Oct. 12, 2014 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.