Immigrants Are the Achilles’ Heel of the American “Melting Pot”

Call me biased, but I happen to be a fan of the American system, and time has proven it to be reliable and resilient. However, it has one extremely serious point of failure that has only grown worse with time. I will explain, and use the 1986 American animated film An American Tail to illustrate what I mean.

The American legislative system as we know it originated with the Great Compromise of 1787, leading to the creation of two houses: a lower house with proportional representation to states (House of Representatives), and an upper house with equal representation (Two senators per state). As implied by the name, this arrangement was a compromise that somewhat empowered individual voters while respecting the sovereignty of states. The idea of sovereignty for states carries even over into the way we elect our presidents in the Electoral College. Individual citizens vote for their candidate in a “winner takes all” tally for their state. To actually win the election, a presidential candidate must get a majority in the EC, but not necessarily a majority in the popular vote. It is possible to get a majority of EC votes but actually lose the popular vote, and this does happen from time to time.

I have no problem with this and find the system to be quite fair and consistent with the ideals this country is based on. We are, after all, called the “United States of America,” not the “United Popular Vote of America.” American states have always, at least in theory, been the most important level of government in the USA. The EC, if nothing else, at least forces candidates to visit every state and take their specific issues seriously. If the president was chosen by popular vote, a presidential candidate could visit California, New York, Texas, and Florida and completely ignoring the rest of the country. That’s what Hillary Clinton basically did back in 2016, confident that the sheer population density of these big states would be enough to carry the election for her and she was horribly wrong.

Furthermore, I think the complainers who whine that the EC is unfair tend to be the same people who dislike the USA as a country and want to completely change it to be like something else. Democrats in particular love to whine that the EC is undemocratic and chant “one person, one vote,” which I find to be very funny because it reminds me of “four legs good, two legs bad.” Like Orwell’s sheep, these people chant the same line over and over and think it’s a compelling argument in of itself, and gets more compelling the more they repeat it. The concept of one person/one vote is very nice, but it has no basis in the US Constitution, so it’s irrelevant. Incidentally, the Wikipedia page for “One man, one vote” is very funny. It tries very hard to support the claim that this is some fundamental pillar of democracy going all the way back to 1880s Britain, but the page itself was only created in 2005. If “one man (or person), one vote” was so crucial to the democratic process, wouldn’t it have been one of the first Wikipedia politics articles back in 2001? On the contrary, someone only felt compelled to create it after George Bush won the 2004 election, but with a popular minority. People (mostly liberals) trying to retroactively re-write history to validate their present day beliefs is a trend I’ve been noticing more and more lately. I’m not saying that this wasn’t something people argued about in 1880s Britain, but I am saying that modern-day liberals trying to force a major political change in the USA are wildly exaggerating the historical significance of this catch phrase.

Overall, the American political system is extremely resilient, I would go so far as to say it is one of the most resilient political systems in the history of the world. What I mean by that is the system can take a huge amount of abuse and still function somewhat correctly. Most other governments would have completely collapsed a long time ago, while the USA carries on as normal. Now I don’t think that’s a controversial statement for me to make either. After all, the USA was founded as a compromise between two radically conflicting factions; slave states and free states. The system was built by design to be able to handle a huge amount of polarization. The Civil War, Jim Crowe, and the civil rights movement played out and finally resolved the fundamental issue that was dividing the states for 200 years. Logically, this should have ushered in a new era of the USA being more peaceful and united than ever, but that’s not what happened, is it?

Slavery and Jim Crow were a godsend for American politicians. “Racial minorities should have equal rights” or “racial minorities should not have equal rights” is a (literally) black and white issue that politicians could sermonize on to their respective voters without actually having to do anything. It is also a great issue for politically active voters to whine about, but without the expectation of tangible results. “If you don’t vote for my candidate you’re a racist” or alternatively, “if you don’t vote for my candidate you’re a negro lover.” And yet once this candidate takes office, there’s no expectation of results. He can blame all of his failures and inability to get results on the opposition. So the issue of equal rights was basically a stalemate for decades with very few noteworthy victories for either side. After President Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration ended the stalemate with the Civil Rights Act, politicians on both sides of the arena were left with a horrible prospect. Rather than sermonizing for or against racial equality, their success as leaders would be judged by their ability to handle everyday issues, like grain tariffs or road construction. Who wants that?

In the following year, Johnson signed into law the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, reversing long-standing policy up to that point to prefer white Protestants over everyone else. This is one of those laws that seems completely reasonable and noncontroversial on the face of it, but nonetheless served a crucial need for the political establishment: to find a new way to separate and polarize voters.

More immigration has never been popular in the USA, and for the usual reasons. Workers tend to unionize and demand more rights and better conditions. Employers want a source of cheap and desperate workers to break the power of the unionization movement. It’s really that simple and every wave of new immigration into the USA can be attributed to this. For example, in the latter half of the 19th Century, Chinese immigrants were a disproportionately large share of the workforce building the railroads. Ponder that one for a moment. It was a line of work so awful and low-paying, even African Americans didn’t want it. Objectively, building a railroad is probably more miserable and definitely more dangerous than picking cotton. Immigrants are just great workers, even better than slaves. They have few or no legal rights, and wouldn’t know how to exercise those rights anyway. The best immigrant doesn’t speak English, so is isolated from the rest of American society, with no friends who might tell him to demand higher wages or safer working conditions.

All that said, there’s more to it than that. Immigration, as it turns out, is a double-edged sword. Maybe it is most accurate to say that immigration has hidden consequences that aren’t immediately obvious. The problem with immigrants in the USA relates to our legislative system, and the Electoral College for the presidency. The system is resilient, but is highly sensitive to enclaves of people with the same beliefs who vote for the same things. These enclaves don’t even need to be particularly large to be politically important, and can quickly punch well above their weight in elections. So when a particular group of immigrants comes to the USA and become naturalized citizens, and have children who are also citizens, they become important. They become so important, American politicians fear angering them.

Cuban Americans tend to hate Cuba (I guess if someone took away my plantation and said I couldn’t own people as slaves anymore I would be angry too) so overwhelmingly support continued sanctions and hostility toward that country. There are a ton of Cubans in Florida, and Florida is a crucial swing state. To even suggest that the USA and Cuba should have better would be political suicide. There are enough Cubans to theoretically flip elections not just in Florida but several other states too.

Polish Americans overwhelmingly supported NATO enlargement and the bombing of Yugoslavia/Serbia. That’s even more ridiculous, dangerous, and damaging than bad relations with Cuba. The USA had already gotten our way in the Cold War, so it made absolute zero sense to continue pursuing provocative actions against Russia. Many people in the political establishment (including, ironically, Joe Biden) voiced opposition to the idea of NATO enlargement. Continued provocation was irrational and didn’t benefit the USA in any conceivable way. We largely did it to placate angry immigrants, people who weren’t even from here.

While we’re still on the subject of Poles, I’m going to point out that the idea of America being a “melting pot” is total nonsense. I reject the idea that some countries are more “assimilating” than other countries. What actually matters is the immigrants, and some groups of people are in fact more willing and interested in assimilating than others. In my observations, for what they’re worth, Russians tend to become Americans. Russians don’t typically come to the USA and demand the USA become more like Russia. Poles tend to be the opposite. Their famous “Catholic values” simply are not compatible for what American culture was ever like. If they like Polish ideas so much they should have stayed in Poland.

Now, dear reader, do you see the problem? People come to America with a huge axe to grind, and will collectively vote against any politician who even suggests taking away the axe.

There is one special group of American immigrants who have a bigger axe to grind than anyone else in the known universe. Their grievances are so severe, it is impossible to go for more than five minutes without hearing about how they have been oppressed for thousands of years and it is your fault. This group is so oppressed, they need special organizations to punish anyone who says something bad about them.

For this section of the article, I’ll invoke the movie I mentioned in the opening paragraph, An American Tail. Even if you haven’t watched it before, it’s self-explanatory. I’ll share the opening scene here:

Actually, I haven’t thought about An American Tail for a long time, as I haven’t seen it since I was a small child (I didn’t even realize at the time it was about Jews), but a comment from one of the readers here, Red Outsider, jogged my memory. I’ll just share the comment in full:

A notable tangent about the ““they” beat Jews to death in Ukraine” tidbit:

Think back to An American Tail, an animated movie several Americans I’ve known called their favourite. What does the movie open with? The sequence of a Jewish village and its proxy-Jewish mice being attacked and savaged by hellish-looking soldiers wearing Imperial Russian army uniforms and likewise hellish Russian cats.

It’s nothing new. If anything, I always observed that American Jewish self-mythologizing pinned all blame for Jew-related issues and violence solely on Russians and the Russian state – fully exculpating the Poles and even, since the 1990s, the Ukraine. Even though virtually all cases of ethnic violence and blood libel occured in the territories of modern-day Ukraine and Poland. In this view, it’s never the Ukrainian country bumpkin or the Polish townie brandishing a pitchfork against a Jew – it’s always a Russian permitted or outright ordered to do so by the state.

Furthermore, this mythology clearly posits that the violence had implicit or explicit official backing and was even performed by regular army units ordered to ethnically cleanse Jews, even though every anti-Jewish violent episode was a failure of the government to handle tensions or contain radicalized townsfolk, not a government action against Jews. In this way, Russia is conflated with Nazi Germany, just like with the entire Soviet prison system being conflated with Nazi death camps with the mythological “GULAG”.

So, it can safely enough be said that the mythologized version of the Eastern European Jewish population’s past is already there. This new movie is just going to “update it for the modern times” and help cement the idea that the USSR was somehow the enemy of the Jewish people, and America the bodyguard standing in its defense against those Russian cossack cats.

Great asides on the Schrodinger’s Russian bit and below, too. You can observe the Schrodinger thing with Western cultural venues and events – they keep re-labeling great Russian cultural figures as Ukrainians, even when they lived in a town that ended up in the 1991 Ukraine for a few years out of their entire life, even when they were ethnically not even Russian nor “Ukrainian” in the modern “understanding” of it. Meanwhile, any figure from Russian history seen as negative is firmly kept as Russian – even when they lived on territories that were in the 1991 Ukraine for most of their lives, or not Russian at all. Heck, even Stalin is sometimes insistently called Russian, even though his original last name Jugashvili was never a secret from anyone, nor his early life in Georgia – all because “Stalin Bad, Russians Bad, therefore Stalin Russian”.

It really is grimly hilarious how blind trust in emigrants who may have ulterior agendas ended up essentially bankrupting America. America had virtually everything, but the emigre elite with bones to pick and axes to grind and other nations’ historical grudges to fight over (hello, Poland! among very many others) misspent all that power and resources with the actual American people ending up not even getting to benefit from it much.

Doubly grimly hilarious on your note of Republicans doing far more of what the modern Wokies are doing. Really does ring true, especially when you think back to stuff like photos of Mujaheddin in the White House being feted because they’re the battering ram against Russia – just like Azovites are now; and to things like America starting up the modern-day abuse of sports as a medium to make political statements at the expense of sports themselves, with the 1980 Olympics.

Do We Need ANOTHER Zionist Propaganda Flick? (Yes)

The Wikipedia page for An American Tail is very funny. It states, in black and white, that the mouse family is from Shostka, Russia, even though Shostka is in modern Ukraine, which is a classic case of Shrodinger’s Russian. Everything that ever happened in what is now modern Ukraine and Crimea is 100% part of historical Ukrainian culture and ethnicity, unless it’s something bad, then it’s Russian.

Let’s just reflect on these cats for a moment. The ethnic stereotyping is so brazen even Goebbels would blush.

Incidentally, the Cossack stereotype is something that Ukraine wants sole ownership of, which makes American Tail’s cat caricature even funnier to me.

After the opening scene, the mouse/Jew family comes to America, and are disappointed to learn that there are cats here too. So they build a mouse Golem to chase the cats into the sea. Really, think about how insidious that messaging is.

I think if someone took a reel of An American Tail and sent it back in time to 1936 Germany, the nazis would use it as one of their propaganda films without making any changes.

What’s particularly interesting to me is that European Jews come to America and paint themselves as mice, and their alleged aggressors as cats. Except these cats are stripped of the context of nature’s “circle of life.” Real cats hunt because they need to eat. Cartoon cats hunt because they’re evil.

I wouldn’t say it’s inexcusable to paint Holocaust victims as mice and nazis as cats. The problem is that Jewish voices in American media paints everyone else as cats. Hitler was Cat Hitler (okay, fair). Ukrainian Cossacks were Cat Hitler too. Someone who makes a rude rabbi joke on Twitter is Cat Hitler. Russians are bad like Cat Hitler, and Americans are bad too, like Cat Hitler. The only good people in the universe are the mouse Jews and if you don’t immediately accept them and all of their demands, then you are Cat Hitler and they’ll build a mouse Golem to attack you. European Jews came to the USA and spun a “tail” of woe that was almost entirely fictional.

While writing this article I found a rare negative review of An American Tale, and the author makes a curious point:

One day the czar’s mounted troops ride by and burn down both homes, and then Papa Mousekewitz leads his family on a long odyssey to the promised land, while they sing “In America There Are No Cats.” There also are no pogroms, the lyricists might have added, except that the movie never makes it clear just why the czar’s men burned down the houses. One of the central curiosities of “An American Tail” is that it tells a specifically Jewish experience but does not attempt to inform its young viewers that the characters are Jewish or that the house burning was anti-Semitic. I suppose that would be a downer for the little tykes in the theater, but what do they think while watching the present version? That houses are likely to be burned down at random? This bleak view of a cold and heartless universe is enforced onboard the ship to America, where little Fievel amuses himself by staring at barrels full of pickled herring with much the same delight that a modern mouse child might tune in Pee-Wee Herman’s Saturday morning show…

Spielberg is credited as the film’s executive producer, and he was the person who brought the saga of Fievel to Bluth’s workshop. Perhaps he felt some deep-seated urge to tell a Jewish parable in a movie and thought that animation would sugar-coat it for general audiences. The movie has such vague ethnic grounds, however, that only a few children will understand or care that the Mousekewitzes are Jewish. And few of those are likely to be entertained by such a tragic, gloomy story.

But of course vague ethnic stereotyping that flies over the heads of children is deliberate, and effective propaganda. I touched on this idea sort of in my review of Toy Story. Children don’t yet understand the concept of metaphors so take everything literally, and there’s no barrier of reasoning, past experiences, or understanding of the world to interfere with a film’s messaging. It flies straight into their eyes and ears and makes a deeper impression than it ever could to an adult. So it is actually better, from a propaganda perspective, to be cute and vague. See, if a movie simply stated that Russians are evil and Jews are their perpetual victims, that would be a thought-provoking statement worth contemplation. But propaganda is not meant to provoke thought, but the opposite. It needs to be immediately accepted as truth at the most primal level possible. So Russian cats torturing Jewish mice are the best propaganda, even, especially, if the child doesn’t understand that the cats are Ruskies and the mice are Jewish. He just accepts that there is a race of people who are prey and another race of people who are predators.

Once this foundation has been laid, his brain can be subjected to more specific propaganda later in life. Like that he has to blindly support Israel and their ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Now see? If the foundation had been laid wrong in his brain, in a way that provokes thought, he would say “If it is wrong for Russians to oppress Jews, it is also wrong for Jews to oppress Palestinians. Being a victim of a crime doesn’t justify you committing one.” No, his brain has to simply tell him “Jews are literally like mice and can do and take whatever they want because we owe it to them.” Propaganda stories all happen in the land of make-believe where the rules don’t matter, and simple facts can wildly contradict each other, because they’re based on emotions, not logic or reasoning. That’s why in American fiction, the Jewish immigrant is simultaneously a helpless mouse, but at the same time a hard-boiled warrior like in Defiance or Inglorious Basterds (deliberately mispelling words in movie titles is clever). We pity the Jew because he is the victim of vile Russians, but respect him because he is strong enough to easily slaughter the pathetic Palestinians (but we don’t pity the Palestinian like we pity the Jew, because he was never portrayed as a mouse in our cartoons). If this still doesn’t make sense, it doesn’t matter because you’re not a child. Propaganda works best on children and that’s the entire point.

An American Tail isn’t so much a story of immigration like the tag line claims, but rather a story of conquest. Not even conquest, but subversion. It’s a lesson that’s worth reviewing now. These enclaves of imported voters are the ultimate political weapon, and why the USA is projected to be minority white by 2045. The existence of these enclaves are why, since WWII, the USA has been largely a bludgeon for immigrant groups to use to enrich themselves, and exact vengeance on their old rivals. And that’s the reason why the USA has become a center of power and near-unimaginable wealth, but almost none of this wealth ever trickled down to the actual American people.

Ian Kummer

Support my work by making a contribution through Boosty

• Facebook
• VK
• LinkedIn

All text in Reading Junkie posts are free to share or republish without permission, and I highly encourage my fellow bloggers to do so. Please be courteous and link back to the original.

I now have a new YouTube channel that I will use to upload videos from my travels around Russia. Expect new content there soon. Please give me a follow here.

Also feel free to connect with me on Quora (I sometimes share unique articles there).

---

---