Conservative Patriots Group

America in the 21st century

“A republic if you can keep it.” These are the words of Benjamin Franklin when he was asked at the close of the Constitutional Convention what kind of government the founding fathers had created. Keeping that republic is the overriding issue of the 21st century for Americans.

We as Americans are faced today with many issues which will have resounding and long lasting effects on our country. Immigration, terrorism, invasion by the Islamic hordes, the idea put forth by the “one world government” promoters of a Transnational North American Union, the rise of the insane idea of “political correctness and multiculturalism”. All of these issues and more are facing us today.

To understand where America is going and to shape its course in the 21st century we must understand the basics of what the founding fathers gave us, for if we do not understand the foundations of the American system, the house that is America will come tumbling down.

What the founding fathers created was a two pillar system. We can best understand these pillars by looking at the Declaration of Independence. Elucidated clearly in this document are the two things that define the American system of governance. They are “NATURAL RIGHTSand THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED”

From NATURAL RIGHTS we gain the idea of “constitutionalism” in which the people through a constitution limit themselves, but spell out clearly that individuals possess “natural rights” by their nature as human beings and that those rights are god given and are notable to be forfeited and “republicanism” or self-government which is agreed to by the consent of “we the people”.

The system of government that the founding fathers created is one which is constitutionally limited by individual rights and the equality of individual citizenship and democracy based on the idea of a self-governing free people.

Let us pick two of the aforementioned issues before the American people as an example of how American citizenship and our liberal democratic nation-state will be affected in the 21st century. These issues are the transnational new world order conundrum and massive immigration.

There are two doctrines which have traditionally guided the American thought process regarding immigration,adherence to the foundation principles of American constitutional democracy and American assimilation. The foundation principles are set forth in two core documents the Declaration of Independenceand the Constitution. Both of these affirm the sovereignty of a single American people. To witness this you need only read the Preamble to the U.S.Constitution: “We the people of the United States…do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States.”

We must glean three things from these documents: (1) we are one people in one sovereign nation-state; (2) the people are sovereign and self-governing; (3) the authority of the government is limited by the “natural rights” of the people. It can be said that Americais a nation-state united not by common ethnic and religious roots but by theideals of liberty, equality of citizenship, and individual rights.  

American assimilation can be summed up to mean that immigrants adopt American civic values and accept American heritage as their own regardless of when or where they came from. American assimilation means an emotional as well as a philosophical commitment to the nation. Thus,George Washington, in a letter to John Adams, stated that immigrants should be integrated into American life so that "by an inter mixture with our people,they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, and laws: in a word soon become one people”

Alexander Hamilton insisted that "the safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on the love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education, and family." The ultimate success of the American republic, he maintained, depends upon "the preservation of a national spirit and a national character," among native born and immigrant alike.

Clearly the founders insisted on American patriotic assimilation so much so that the Naturalization Law of 1795 required a renunciation under oath of any previous sovereign allegiances. This clause remains today in the law!

One hundred years later President Theodore Roosevelt signed his name to the “Federal Textbook on Citizenship Training” this is what it said:

“In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one soul [sic] loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

Woodrow Wilson was a bitter rival of Theodore Roosevelt. But on the issue of assimilating immigrants they sounded very much like each other, and very like the founders. Thus, at a ceremony in Philadelphiain 1915, President Wilson praised the contributions of immigrants and spoke oftheir obligations to America.He declared:

"You cannot dedicate yourself to America unless you become in every respect and with every purpose of your will thoroughly Americans. You cannot become thoroughly Americans if you think of yourselves in groups. A man who thinks of himself as belonging to a particular national group in America has not yet become an American."

Thus was the idea of “Americanization” a strongly held tenet until the 1960’s when the 1965 Immigration bill spearheaded by Ted Kennedy replaced this axiom with that of political correctness and multiculturalism and to express the idea of

“Americanization”was to be a “racist and a xenophobe” in today’s lexicon we can also add “nativeist”. Beginning with the 1965 Kennedy Immigration bill and continuing through the 1986 Kennedy Immigration and Amnesty act and today with the defeated Comprehensive Immigration bill the idea of “Americanization” has given way to the esoteric notion of “group rights” and “transnationlism”. Architects of “Transnational America” see the United States as a sort of cosmopolitan federation of national colonies made up of foreign cultures moving back and forth between other lands and having allegiances to many other cultures and ethnic beliefs. America has become ground zero for the “new world order” crowd and in their minds it will become the epitome of the “multicultural utopia”.

To illustrate the pervasiveness of this thought process let me point you to the words of Alexander Alienikoff who was in a key position at the INS during the 90’s.Alienikoff declares: “America is under constant contract renegotiation”, this renegotiation is to be undertaken by “mutually respecting ethnic groups”. Alienikoff is expressing the fact that the American idea of assimilation is morphing into the concept of aTransnational America, thus exposing the real agenda of the Ted Kennedy,multicultural, anti American nexus the destruction of traditional America values and the replacement of American sovereignty with that of a Transnational conglomerate. Another key player who was the INS deputy commissioner in 1990 isRobert Bach. Bach is quoted as saying: “The problem in America may not be diversity but homogeneity.” Thus at the highest levels of our government assimilation becomes a problem not a solution.

Working hand inhand with the transnational lobby are activist immigration lawyers who have tirelessly worked to weaken American immigration laws and traditions. Some of the measures they have been pushing are the following:

1) Ending the requirement to renounce prior allegiances.

2) Ending theEnglish language requirement because it is discriminatory.

3) Eliminating the citizenship test completely.

4) Erasing alllegal distinctions between citizens and non-citizens.

5) Encouraging laws granting voting rights to non-citizens.

6) Promoting dual citizenship.

7) Creating new legal categories of “discrimination” that would consider non-citizens legal orillegal as members of a victim group thus bestowing preferential treatment onthis people.

Proposing that international immigration law override U.S. constitutional law.

The elites of theNew World Order, the Hate America crowd, the multicultural sycophants, the ACLU, and the Washington politicos have become an amalgamated army for change, a change which does not bode well for the American dream.

The assumptions of this group include but are not limited to:

1) The primacy of the culture group over the individual citizen.

2) A dichotomy of groups namely oppressor groups versus victim groups. Immigrate groups are of course victim groups. Oppressor groups are singularly defined as “white male Anglos”.

3) Group proportionlism as a goal of society.

4) The values of all dominant institutions must be changed to reflect the values of victims groups.

5) Pursue demographic changes which will render the traditional American land scape obsolete.

6) Redefine American democracy from one that trumpets majority rule among equal citizens to one in which power is shared among cultural groups of both citizens and non-citizens.

We are at a crossroad in America and it remains to be seen whether this American generation will rise to the challenge or allow 230 years of American tradition to be swept into the dust bin of history. The challenge to traditional American ideals of citizenship,patriotism, and assimilation are formidable. We are faced with the survival ofthe American paradigm. If our system is based not on individual rights, but on group rights, not on equal citizenship for all but on certain categories of groups including non-citizens who are deserving of special treatment, not on majority rule, but power sharing by different ethnic, racial, gender, and linguistic groups, not on constitutional law but transnational law; then this country will cease to be “constitutional”, “democratic” and “American”. This land of ours will simply become a balkanized, “post-constitutional”, “post-democratic”,“post-American” nightmare!  

So friends this is our challenge to us, this generation of Americans, and it is literally a matter of life or death:

E. Pluribus Unum

Out of many one. One people. One America

Laus Deo

Regards

KAFIR

The Unbeliever

LAN ASTASLEM

لن استسلم

I will not submit: “To Islam!”

July 4th, 2010