Time Magazine has put a lot of its articles online free, which makes it a useful historical reference. I was able to find a link to the story Peter Brimelow is quoting from in Alien Nation, and the writer, John Elson, hits all the usual notes:

Today, U.S. government policy is literally dissolving the people and electing a new one ….You can be for this or you can be against it. But the fact is undeniable.

“Still,” Time magazine wrote in its Fall 1993 “Special Issue on Multiculturalism,” “for the first time in its history, the U.S. has an immigration policy that, for better or worse, is truly democratic.”[Sometimes the Door Slams Shut Thursday, Dec. 02, 1993 By John Elson]

As an immigrant, albeit one who came here rather earlier than yesterday and is now an American citizen, I find myself asking with fascination: what can this possibly mean? American immigration policy has always been democratic, of course, in the sense that it has been made through democratic procedures. Right now, as a matter of fact, it’s unusually undemocratic, in the sense that Americans have told pollsters long and loudly that they don’t want any more immigration; but the politicians ignore them.

I suspect that Time magazine …must feel vaguely that “democracy” has something to do with everyone in the world being treated equally. (Which is not how current U.S. immigration policy actually treats them, but that’s a detail.) Their notion of democracy, in other words, has degenerated to the point where it is assumed to require invalidating the right to an independent existence of the very demos, people, community, that is supposed to be taking decisions on its own behalf. Democracy becomes self-liquidating, like the famous bird allegedly discovered by World War II aviators that flew around in ever-decreasing circles until it finally, remarkably, disappeared.

Personally, I doubt it will prove possible to run the United States, or any other society, on this principle. [Peter Brimelow, Preface to Alien Nation, Page xviii, 1995]

I was recently interviewed by Ralph Ovadal of “The Heart of the Matter”. The recent Bush visit to Mexico was discussed, along with several other National Question topics. You can hear the interview here and my segment begins at 62:17.

In a recent speech before supporters of his center-right UMP Party, front-running French presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy called for the creation of a “Ministry of Immigration and National Identity”. The proposal – which is neither new nor particularly controversial in itself (most European countries have some sort of immigration ministry) – was immediately condemned by political opponents on the left and even by certain members of Sarkozy’s entourage, who claimed to find something dangerously ambiguous in the term “national identity”.

No sooner had the controversy broken out than it was resolved in Sarkozy’s favor. With a majority of those polled saying they favor the idea and respondents on the right – Sarkozy’s target audience – indicating overwhelmingly support, Sarkozy could claim victory over his wrong-footed rivals on the left, none of whom, in the words of Le Monde, “dare directly address the theme of immigration” (translation here).

From the outset, Sarkozy’s campaign has carefully ridden the immigration issue, at once appealing to and distancing itself from the sensibilities of far right voters (e.g., by calling for assimilation and more rigorous “selection” of prospective immigrants while endorsing the principle of labor migration).

In part, the aim of this strategy has been to contain Front national candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen whose April 21st, 2002 shock victory over Socialist Prime Minister Lionel Jospin is still fresh in the mind of French politicians.

But, just as importantly, the Sarkozy team hopes that their candidate’s tough talk will rally undecided voters on election day. By consistently returning to the issue, Sarkozy not only protects his right but also forces the left to fight on terrain where they are at a distinct disadvantage.

So far, this two front strategy on immigration has been a resounding success.
While Sarkozy’s overtures do not seem to have made much of a dent among Le Pen voters (Le Pen, who is systematically under-estimated by the polls, is stable at 14%), they have dissuaded center-right voters from crossing over to the Front national. In the meantime, Sarkozy’s lead on Socialist Party rival Ségolène Royal continues to grow, jumping by two points following his “Ministry of Immigration” announcement.

With just a month left before voting begins, Nicolas Sarkozy looks increasingly like the next President of France. If so, it will be the clearest sign yet that, where immigration is concerned, the political center has shifted in Europe.