“Conservatve” website proposes annexing Mexico

Steve D. writes:

I don’t know if you’ve seen this, but it provides a small window into the thinking of many American conservatives. Last Sunday on RedState, there was a discussion over a floated proposal to invade and annex Mexico. Judging by the responses—which are, figuratively, all over the map—the consensus seems to be “maybe.”

Below is the culminating passage in the article Steve linked. Showing a complete absence of logic, the author leaps from the possible necessity of the U.S. invading Mexico in order to destroy the drug gangs, to the desirability of the U.S. annexing Mexico and making it the 51st state of the United States, or perhaps the 51st through the 65th state. He makes this proposal, even while emphasizing the profound dysfunctionality of Mexico as a society. Why does he not quail at the thought of adding an entire dysfunctional society of one hundred million people to the United States? Because he thinks that they can be “assimilated.”

After reading the article, note the number of commenters who do not outright dismiss the idea, but seem to entertain it.

And this is at “Red State,” a blog the very name of which means conservative.

Correction. “Red State” does not mean conservative. It means Republican. So the uber fatuous reasoning on display here is perhaps somewhat less of a surprise.

The author’s one wise gesture is to decline to provide his name, only giving the name of his blog, “LaborUnionReport.”

… In 2013 and beyond, though, all bets are off. If the Mexican government cannot contain the violence in that country, or more bloodshed occurs on the U.S. side of the border, either the Mexican government may request humanitarian aide, or the U.S. would be justified in acting unilaterally to go into Mexico to end the drug cartels’ brutal terrorism (it’s not like it hasn’t happened before). In fact, if the violence on the U.S. side of the border does not cease, or escalates further, whomever is sitting in the oval office will be hard pressed not to go into Mexico.

Nation Build or Annex Mexico?

The question then become what to do afterward. Is the U.S. ready for another protracted foray into nation building? Or, in the alternative, does Mexico enter the United States as the 51st state?

Now, this should not be considered an ‘endorsement’ of either idea (see note below). Rather, it is more of a cost-benefit analysis that requires much more study:

Rather than nation building, which would be much more costly to the U.S. treasury (which can ill afford it), a case can be made for statehood (albeit, not without controversy), given the amount of Mexico’s citizenry that is already residing in the U.S., as well as Mexico’s historically mis-managed economy and resources (i.e., oil, farmland, beaches, ports, etc.). Moreover, as so many illegal immigrants work already in the U.S., but send their earnings back to Mexico, by having Mexico become the 51st state, the money exported would not leave the U.S. but would stay in “our economy” and could offset the costs of an invasion/humanitarian mission. Most importantly, by assimilating Mexico into the U.S., with the Constitution it would solve the issue of immigration reform in one fell swoop.

Note: Being well aware of the tin-hat/NWO conspiracy theories, this is not a CFR/TC conceived idea. Instead it is an examination of current events caused by a bunch of narco-terrorists and illegal immigration, as well as an attempt to figure out what do we do about it?

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 14, 2010 06:18 PM | Send