The diversity do-gooders of Green Bay Wisconsin have decided that the community is too white and something must be done. (Maybe they should check in with Wausau, which had similar social engineering ideas a couple decades back, and the outcome was less than kumbaya: The Ordeal of Immigration in Wausau.)

Say, has anyone asked the people of Green Bay whether they want to be diversified?

A group of Green Bay community leaders says the city lacks diversity, and they’re on a mission to change that. A new committee’s goal is to create more culture in Green Bay.

According to the latest figures from the U.S. Census Bureau, blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asians combined make up 20 percent of Green Bay’s population. This new group, the Diversity Committee, wants to increase that number and is determined to make it happen.
[Changing the Color of Green Bay, WBAY-TV 6/22/07]

Note the curious belief that America has no culture, and we must import it from elsewhere.

A recent study found that while diversity is widely considered as a positive aspect in society, its boosters are a little vague on what the idea actually means beyond the bumper sticker: U of M study finds that Americans couch feelings about race in the ‘happy talk’ of diversity-speak.

“The public debates and talk-show lamentations about immigration and political correctness leave many Americans to assume there’s a big divide in the country between those who value diversity and those who reject it,” said Doug Hartmann, associate sociology professor, who coauthored the study with graduate student Joyce Bell. “The fact is, most Americans value diversity - but they see it as a benefit with the potential cost of cultural disunity and social instability.”

Meanwhile, Harvard Prof Robert Putnam continues to find more evidence that diversity decreases trust and reduces social capital.

Putnam held back findings because the results disturbed his liberal sensibility.

Why is the tribal nature of human psychology so hard for liberal professors to accept? Not maleable enough, perhaps?

We all prefer to be around others who speak our language, share our values and understand our jokes. Human community is based upon similarities, not differences. Wouldn’t it be better to develop public policy on the basis of human nature as it really is?

The Green Bay social engineers should take a trip to the Lost Angeles area and see what multicultural immigration has wrought. One stop should be the diverse Catholic church, Our Lady of La Vang in Santa Ana, to get the full effect.

Latinos take the chairs on the right, Vietnamese go left.

Father Joseph Nguyen quietly watches from the altar before moving to the pulpit, where he preaches five minutes in Spanish, then Vietnamese, then Spanish, alternating until the service ends. Prayers, songs and responses are done in both languages.
[O.C.'s mix of cultures yields cooperation, tensions, LA Times 6/23/07]

Language pong! That sounds spiritually uplifting.

The churches are so brainwashed with do-gooderism that they think Babel is a good thing. Not according to the Bible.

Charles Babington writes at Associated Press:

Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., told reporters last week, “Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem.” Some hosts, he added, do not know what is in the lengthy bill.

The comments incensed conservative talk show hosts who generally had supported Lott over the years.

Lott is “upset that the American people got right into the middle of the conversation over the problem with illegal aliens and it didn’t turn out all that well for the pro-amnesty forces,” Atlanta-based talk show host Neal Boortz wrote on his Web site.

“If Trent Lott and his other buddies up on the Hill aren’t listening to ‘talk,’ then what are they listening to? The answer is either their wallet or their legacy.”

Radio host Rush Limbaugh asked his audience: “What are we going to do about Mississippi Senator Trent Lott?”[ Talk shows influence immigration debate, Jun 23, 2007]

Some folks accuse Lott of being racist. I don’t think that is accurate. If this man had to choose racial interests and economic royalism, I think he’ll ultimately support monied interests.

Talk radio is among the more democratic of the corporate media-for the simple reason that there is less money involved than television. The entry price for buying a radio station or getting a syndicated talk show available nationwide is just a lot less than for many other media. Furthermore, podcasts are nipping at the heals of talk radio-people can hear the kind of news they want to hear at a fairly affordable price

I tend to think the conservative alliance of corporate interests and folks with either white racial or traditional religious identification is fundamentally unworkable long run. Corporate interests in the US are only able to maintain the illusion of prosperity by liquidating assets-and increasingly the big non-concentrated asset left for them to liquidate is the economic value of citizenship.

The only way folks like the Bush Dynasty and Trent Lott can maintain their position is by increasingly resorting to non-democratic mechanisms-like fixing the Florida vote in 2000 or admitting large numbers of guest workers that have no voting rights.

Talk radio hosts ultimately have to attract listeners in significant numbers. Some founders feared, democracy might degenerate into mob rule. It is the job of folks in institutions like the Senate to moderate that tendency. Sadly, the Senate just plain isn’t doing their job. That would be even more apparent with a more democratic house and decentralized media control. What we have here isn’t mob rule, but oligarchy that is out of control.

At this point, public opinion is still pretty moderate towards recent immigrants. The public appears to want less immigration and doesn’t want undue hardship to recent poor immigrants to result from enforcement of immigration laws. What the senate is getting in trouble for is an immigration policy that assures that all the costs of fixing immigration will fall squarely on the mass of American citizens and continues to allow corporate interests to mine the value of US citizenship for the gain of a few wealthy interests. That problem just won’t go away.

As I’ve pointed out before, it’s not only poor Mexicans who want to emigrate (in fact, the poorest Mexicans are too poor to emigrate) but many middle-class Mexicans as well. According to a recent online poll of Mexican professionals, 82% expressed interest in moving to the U.S., with 17% of them willing to emigrate illegally.

The bottom line is, as long as the U.S. allows the mass migration of Mexicans, both legally and illegally, it will continue, to the detriment of both countries.

Via Instapundit, this Wired.com story: Farms Fund Robots to Replace Migrant Fruit Pickers.

Vision Robotics, a San Diego company, is working on a pair of robots that would trundle through orchards plucking oranges, apples or other fruit from the trees. In a few years, troops of these machines could perform the tedious and labor-intensive task of fruit picking that currently employs thousands of migrant workers each season.

The robotic work has been funded entirely by agricultural associations, and pushed forward by the uncertainty surrounding the migrant labor force. Farmers are “very, very nervous about the availability and cost of labor in the near future,” says Vision Robotics CEO Derek Morikawa.

Of course, that’s who should be funding cheaper picking–the growers, who profit from it. For years, they’ve been pushing the costs of cheap labor on the taxpayers.

Instapundit says

Eventually, of course, the robots will be made in China, and American-built robots will complain if they’re imported illegally.

But the real point is that robots don’t join gangs, take over local governments, riot in schools, or commit gang rape. Previous robo-blogging here, and here, and see also the serious columns from Sailer and Sam Francis.

I just received in email a copy of a letter Samuel Gompers, an early president of the American Federation of Labor, and an “immigrant himself”--he was born in London.

The text was published on the Social Contract Press’s website in PDF, formatted, or HTML:A Voice from the Past - 1921 letter by Samuel Gompers , The Social Contract (Fall 1999) ,by Samuel Gompers, but I’ve also uploaded the original document here[PDF] with the original typewriting and signature.

The letter was written before the Immigration Act Of 1924, and makes it clear that that was what Gompers was working towards. After discussing the prospects of legislation, he puts forward the “citizenist” position.
(more…)

Increasingly it appears the latest round of Bush Betrayal really has unleashed a seismic event in American politics. Consider this posting at the excellent Lonewacko blog (long distinguished for powerful patriotic work on the immigration disaster). Lonewacko is reporting yesterday’s email from NumbersUSA on the prospects for defeating Tuesday’s cloture vote (7 to 10 more votes needed). But the link used to display the email is actually a posting on FreeRepublic.

FreeRepublic, of course, notoriously banned VDARE.com links several years ago, and generally suppressed discussion of immigration policy, including deleting postings. That Lonewacko, which knows what it is doing, feels confident in using the link (e.g. that it will not be removed), indicates a major change has taken place.

The Republican base has burst into rebellion and the Beltway types are not going to be able to control this.

(P.S. Yes, I know the title shows my age.)