Yes, the sniper(s) may well be Islamic terrorists. Our MOST important task is keeping these people OUT, not bringing them in. One gets really tired of having to say this.

It occurs to me that that’s why officialdom has been so slow to suggest that the sniper (or snipers) is part of an Islamic terrorist group. Hijacking an airliner and using it as a missile is a spectacular act, almost outside of ordinary life; but the image of Muslim terrorists being so infiltrated into the fabric of ordinary American life that they’re effortlessly shooting down Americans as they shop and buy gas, would make the threat represented by the presence of Muslims in this country too real. It would make people not want to have them here anymore. And the government at all costs wants to prevent people from making that conclusion.

Mr. Auster says, in his comment’s closing,

“It would make people not want to have them here anymore. And the government at all costs wants to prevent people from making that conclusion.”

Can we be specific each time we make reference to the forces pushing unlimited incompatible immigration? Can we name the exact pressure groups who are forcing it down the unwilling throats of Americans who’ve said in poll after poll after poll they don’t want it — don’t want their traditional culture or ethnic balance transformed?

We’ve all heard of the role of neocons in exerting influence in this regard — on the Bush administration, on National Review, and in other ways. We’ve heard less about the involvment of Wall Street and big (and medium and small) business (who want low-wage, docile scab labor). We’ve heard less about the Catholic Church, which hopes the massive importation of a portion of Mexico’s Catholic peasantry will have a re-vitalizing effect. We’ve heard less about the Dem Party simply wanting to assure there will be enough Dem voters for many more years to come.

Each time reference is made to the forces pushing the ethno-cultural transformation of this country through inappropriate immigration, can we see a list of, say, the top half-dozen culprits spelled out in no uncertain terms, letting the chips fall where they may no matter who gets offended at having the spotlight shone on them?

Spell it out. We can’t fight what we can’t see.

Well, Unadorned has already listed several such pressure groups, and of course there are many others. But as I understand the issue it’s not primarily a matter of this or that special interest group forcing its will on America. It is America itself that is accepting the immigration and that does not have within itself the active principle that would oppose the immigration. To oppose the immigration on cultural grounds implies saying that there’s an “us” which doesn’t want more of “them” to come here. But Americans don’t have the desire or conviction to say that anymore, because on a fundamental level Americans no longer have the sense of “us.” They have, psychologically and spiritually, ceased being a nation. America is a collection of principles, such as freedom, family, capitalism, and a collection of functions adding up up to a modern society. Americans feel comfortable defending those principles and those functions, but they don’t feel comfortable defending America as a nation, a culture, a people. This is as true of regular conservatives as much as of neocons or liberals.

The challenge is to gain back the sense of peoplehood, of “us,” and the will to assert it. Without that, nothing else is possible and immigration reform will always be stymied.

See my article Immigration and Multiculturalism: Why are the conservatives silent? http://www.counterrevolution.net/vfr/archives/000637.html