By Selwyn Duke

Saying there’s a bright side to amnesty may seem much like talk
of the advantages of malignant cancer. But this won’t be a pie-in-the-sky
article about the “economic benefits” of new workers, expanding the tax base or
the wonders of “diversity.” There is no Ayotte-Rubio flip-flop here; in fact,
for those who don’t know me, I’ve long called for a halt to even legal
immigration. And understanding why is necessary to put amnesty’s “bright side”
in perspective.

It is an inconvenient and ignored truth that the main problems
posed by illegal migration are essentially the same problems of legal
immigration. Are you concerned about an influx of low-skilled workers driving
down wages and competing with native Americans? Legal immigration also floods
the nation with low-skilled workers. Do you worry that amnesty will grow
Democrat voter rolls? A vast majority of legal immigrants also vote Democrat.
Most significantly, do you fret that millions of unassimilable foreigners with
values contrary to Western ideals are transforming our culture into something
distinctly non-Western? Legal immigrants are essentially of the same
demographic, with 1965’s Immigration Reform Act ensuring that 85 percent of
them hail from the Third World and Asia. The lesson?

Illegal migration isn’t the problem.

It’s an exacerbation
of the problem.  

To worry about it while accepting our current legal-immigration
model is like losing sleep over the occasional counterfeiter while batting nary
an eye at our government’s legalized counterfeiting (“quantitative easing”).

Of course, there is the difference that we can’t scrutinize
undocumented Democrats and ensure that they’re not carrying bombs along with
their bad ideology. But with respect to the only thing that matters over the
long term — the destruction of Western culture in America — the most relevant
way to define the types of migration isn’t “legal” and “illegal,” but good and
bad. And, for the most part, the US has only one kind: the bad.

For those who would dispute this and say “Hey, everyone
eventually assimilates; it just may take a couple of generations,” know that
neither today’s immigrants nor today’s US are what they once were. For
starters, approximately 50 percent of our new arrivals hail from Mexico alone,
and 67 percent of American Hispanics have origins in that nation. University of
Edinburgh professor Stephen Tierney explains what this means in his book Multiculturalism
and the Canadian Constitution, writing:

In a situation in which immigrants
are divided into many different groups originating in distant countries, there
is no feasible prospect of any particular immigrant group’s challenging the
hegemony of the national language [Tim
Kaine’s español, anyone?] and institutions.  These groups may form an
alliance among themselves to fight for better treatment and accommodations, but
such an alliance can only be developed within the language and institutions of
the host society and, hence, is integrative.  In situations in which a
single dominant immigrant group originates in a neighbouring country, the
dynamics may be very different.  The Arabs in Spain, and Mexicans in the
United States, do not need allies among other immigrant groups.  One could
imagine claims for Arabic or Spanish to be declared a second official language,
at least in regions where they are concentrated, and these immigrants could
seek support from their neighbouring home country for such claims — in effect,
establishing a kind of transnational extension of their original homeland in
their new neighbouring country of residence.

And the blindness to the above helps explain the logic to
many Republicans’ capitulation on amnesty. If the main threats posed by the two
separated-by-legality migrations are the same and people don’t recognize them
with respect to one, why should we be shocked that they don’t recognize them
with respect to the other?

The truth is that amnesty is inevitable. If not the current
version, a future one; if not today, tomorrow. This is because the nation has
long been moving left, and when it slides far enough, all of the liberal agenda
will be realized. And the importation of socialist-minded voters is a major
factor in this transformation. Oh, I know that some — notably Ann Coulter in an
excellent article
recently — point to polls showing that amnesty isn’t very high on Hispanics’
priority list. But this argument overlooks two things. First, all the polls
mean is that Hispanics care about issues such as the economy and health care
more, not that they don’t care about amnesty at all. Second, it’s much as with
many blacks’ current opposition to amnesty. It’s irrelevant in a practical
sense as long as, driven by anti-Republican prejudice and a desire for big
government, these two groups continue supporting Democrats. People don’t smoke
because they want tar in their lungs, but it comes with the choice.

Worse still, there will be no such thing as an amnesty with
teeth, no matter what the Rubios of the world claim. Ultimately, there will be
no significant border enforcement, no denial of benefits, no true accountability
for illegal migrants. How do I know? It isn’t just that there never has been
despite our having offered seven
amnesties, and the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. It is
because law means nothing without a certain necessary ingredient.

Will.

The left continually proves this. The Defense of Marriage
Act is law, but Barack Obama simply refuses to enforce it. We have long had
sanctuary (i.e., lawless) cities and those that refuse to obey federal drug
laws. And, of course, there are literally thousands of more obscure laws on the
books that are routinely ignored by states and localities, and our government
has been trampling much of the supreme law of the land — the Constitution — for
100 years. Even more to the point here, the Obama administration has refused to
enforce immigration laws already on the books and has granted a form of amnesty
by executive order. So why suppose that a few more immigration laws would make
a difference?

And the truth here is a sort of Catch-22: What would it mean
if we really had the will to secure the border and enforce unwelcome rules on
legalized illegals?

It would translate into our saying in the first place,
unabashedly and unashamedly, “Get the heck out of our country.”

If our will is so wanting that we’ll pander on the big thing
and not do what any sane nation does instinctively — deport invaders — it’s
beyond silly to think we’ll suddenly man-up on the little things (especially
since we have no history of doing that, either).

Given the dark picture I’ve painted, you may wonder what its
bright side might be. Amnesty is inevitable, but even if it weren’t we’d still
be finished because of our bad legal migration? Pass the hemlock. Yet there is
a possible lemons-into-lemonade outcome .

Americans have become inured to the legal-immigration
problem, accepting a no-go status quo like that proverbial frog in the frying
pan of water. So the question is, how can you awaken reptilian-brain voters, who
can’t sense steadily rising heat, to their impending 212-degree demise?

You turn up the flame.

High.

And along with the other ways that power is causing the left
to stir the pot — the IRS abuses, ObamaCare, the anti-traditionalist rhetoric
and violence — amnesty may help do just that. This could add fuel to the only
hope for avoiding a descent into Third World autocracy. What is that hope?
Well, if you have a severely gangrenous limb, you don’t entertain the fancy
that the infection won’t spread if you simply label necrotic tissue healthy.

You cut your losses.

And our only hope is just that: the secessionist movement.

Hopefully, before states have to try to separate from Mexico
Norte.

Lest I be misunderstood, this doesn’t mean I won’t fight the
good fight. I’ll still oppose amnesty because doing so accords with truth. But
I’ll also say that inside-the-box solutions are hopeless because that is the
truth. And I’ll point out, as Christians would say, that God can bring good out
of bad because that is the truth.

And we’d better hope and pray that this happens because, as
far as our options go, bad is all we’ve got.

                     Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

                                              © 2013 Selwyn Duke — All Rights Reserved