By Selwyn Duke

No matter which prominent side wins in our immigration debates, the U.S. loses for a simple reason: The contest pits people who hate the point against people who miss the point.

On one side are the large-I Immigrationists, individuals who behave as if immigration is always good, always necessary, must never be questioned and must be the one constant in an otherwise ever-changing universe of policy; they’re usually identified as “leftists.” On the other are small-i immigrationists, people who believe immigration is generally good, generally necessary, should never be questioned in principle and must in some form be the one constant in an otherwise ever-changing universe of policy; they’re usually identified as “conservatives.”

The debate between the two sides often goes like this: Leftists welcome inundation with even uneducated, unskilled foreigners (as long as the aliens aren’t sent to their neighborhood; see Martha’s Vineyard et al.) with the argument “Our strength lies in our diversity!” Conservatives counter this by reassuring all and sundry “I’m all for immigration!” “But,” they add, “it should be done legally and be merit based, with possession of economically valuable skills a prerequisite for entry.”

(more…)

By Selwyn Duke

We had an interesting discussion. 

By Selwyn Duke

How would it go over if people said that white kids could only be instructed by white guides and educators and then fired non-white employees on that basis? What would be the reaction if the justification was, “Well, white kids just can’t relate to non-white staff?”

This hasn’t happened, of course — but the reverse has. A recent example is the axing of white museum docents (volunteer guides) in the name of prejudice euphemized as “diversity.”

Read the rest here.

By Selwyn Duke

“Parting is such sweet sorrow” is a Shakespearean sentiment that, a new study shows, large numbers of Americans do not share. In fact, not only do high percentages of both Republicans and Democrats want to divide our country into “red” and “blue” states, but many among them want to give the other side a punch in the mouth before parting ways.

Read the rest here.

By Selwyn Duke

Why did a huge German study of 45,000 immigrant youths find that while increasing religiosity among Christian youths made them less violent, increasing religiosity among Muslim youths actually made them more violent? Egyptian scholar Dr. Ahmed Abdu‘ Maher thinks he knows, and he’s been condemned and even sentenced to five years’ prison time (and then pardoned) for voicing his theory. But as with the Howard Beale character in 1976’s Network, Maher may now be saying, “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!” In fact, the reformer has just released a video in which he rebukes his critics and states that he does nothing but quote the books of the Islamic canon they hold so dear.

Read the rest here.

By Selwyn Duke

It’s bad enough when Americans hear, and have good reason to believe, “Laws are only for the little people.” But there’s perhaps an even more bitter pill:

Having good reason to believe laws are also only for citizens.

This very much appears the case, too, when hearing endless excuses for why the pseudo-elites won’t deport illegal aliens and pondering that instead of there being “white privilege,” there’s flight privilege.

That is, take flight from your nation and invade another and privileges will be yours — as is happening in Illinois, where illegals are now getting money previously earmarked for needy citizens.

Read the rest here.

By Selwyn Duke

Since leftists have long been known for “situational values,” it’s not surprising that they now exhibit situational environmentalism. It works like this: Something is deemed an “irreplaceable natural resource” that must be preserved at all costs.

Thirty years later, it can be destroyed because, well, if you want to make a green omelet, you’ve got to break a few green eggs (and ham?).

And now, 30 years later is today, and on the chopping block are forests — and the animals living within. Yes, trees, once considered sacred and a reason to transition away from paper supermarket bags (in the ’70s), are currently being cleared in deference to the greentopian climate agenda. The latest example is that this movement, which has targeted forests from the North Maine Woods to the Scottish Highlands to Germany, wants to transform Australia’s koala habitat into a windmill wasteland.

Read the rest here.

By Selwyn Duke

It’s a murder-case twist that may shock you — that is, unless you believe, as two commentators put it last year, that leftists “have a pedophilia problem.” And if so, new revelations about the killing of homosexual journalist Josh Kruger may seem entirely intuitive.

Read the rest here.

By Selwyn Duke

First was the attempt at rebranding pedophiles as “minor-attracted people” and the urges they feel as just another “sexual orientation.” Now there’s the latest: At a recent socialism conference, activists discussed how to promote a “children’s liberation vision” with regard to the sex industry.

But, hey, don’t let any of those tin-foil-hat-wearing Maga-billies tell you the Left has put us on a slippery slope to pedophilia. They’re delusional!

Read the rest here.

By Selwyn Duke

If you thought having your own personal pronouns, and imposing their use on others, was the epitome of narcissism, try this on for size:

Some people, with all or most all currently being women, are pursuing “self-marriage” so that they can “fully commit” to themselves.

What’s more, this phenomenon is established enough so that it even has a name: Sologamy (or “autogamy”). And while Wikipedia describes it as “marriage by a person to themself” — incorrectly using a combination of a plural and singular pronoun — no, engaging in the practice doesn’t require you to have multiple personalities, just singular self-focus.

Read the rest here.