I took you as a guest into my home, and now you’re complaining about the furnishings, the meals I cook, the books on the shelves, the prayers I say each evening.

You tell me I ought to appreciate the “diversity” your presence brings to my otherwise bland existence —- and you think I should not perceive this suggestion as the insult it really is.

Now you tell me I have no right to ask you to leave when you’ve overstayed your welcome, or to close the door against your friends who are also looking for a place to crash.

In your eyes, after all, this is no longer *my* home …

One point to bear in mind is that these complaints and demands originate not so much with the guest as with the local social worker who persuaded you to take him in, and who thinks things would work ever so much better if social workers had total control of all aspects of your existence and with that in mind wants to cure you of the idea that it’s “your” house.

Yes. We need to recognize that all this is yet another form of redistributionism.

The “social workers” you describe begin with the assumption that our prior claims to our property and institutions are invalid. They want to seize these things from us, then divide the spoils amongst themselves and those they consider deserving.

*We* are to be turned out of our homes and into the street, unless we grovel sufficiently before our new masters and make a convincing show of orthodoxy in our thinking.

Western culture has already been condemned, so the fact that these immigrants will replace it with their own is of no importance to the social workers.

As another article pointed out, the social workers are now operating at a global level, and this is why nations are being told they must accept immigration, no matter how much disruption it causes in their “homes”.

(A home is more than a house, btw. It’s the embodiment of a way of life, or the concrete instantiation of a mode of dwelling in the world. It’s a place that’s richly layered with memories. With traditions, if you will…)