John Daniel Davidson has come right out and openly said the things
that Tucker Carlson had said in a language that was so subtle, it was
practically incomprehensible.
Davidson then followed with an article in which he admitted that
most of the blame for the loss of American values falls –– not on the shoulders
of immigrants but –– on the shoulders of the native-born Americans. In fact,
you'll get a hint of that even in the title and subtitle of the article.
The title reads as follows: “Tucker Carlson Has A Point About The
Dangers Of Immigration.” And the subtitle reads as follows: “We're not very
good at instilling American values in immigrants because we're not very good
about instilling them among the native-born.” The article was published on July
12, 2019 in The Federalist. Early on, you encounter this admission: David
Harsanyi says that liberal immigration policies are good and add much to
American society. In general, this is correct. Or at least it has been the case
throughout most of our history.
Still, the problem with John Davidson's article is that it only
tells half the story. Yes, they all admit that most of the blame for the loss
of American values is due to the neglect at instilling those values in the
native-born Americans, be they young or old –– but when was the last time that
those values were instilled in anyone? And why, how and by whom was the process
stopped? In fact, without making a clearheaded effort to answer these
questions, Davidson went ahead and explained how he sees the current situation:
“Why take in immigrants just to have their children attend schools
and universities that teach them to hate America? The infiltration of our
institutions by progressives is pervasive. You can't go to a public library
without having progressive values forced on you. Beyond institutions, we're
faced with corporations pushing identity politics on their customers. It's hard
to create patriotic Americans in such an environment, and harder still to
persuade newcomers to be patriotic Americans. Somewhere along the line, Omar
was taught to despise this country. That should give us pause because it means
the problem goes far beyond immigration. It includes all of us, and nearly every
institution of public life. Omar is living proof that the way we educate our
children, and the way we live as a nation, is very dangerous indeed”.
But did John Davidson deliberately or inadvertently plant clues in
the article to hint as to who might be the culprit that caused the
deterioration of American values? Did he tell how and why they deteriorated?
Well, there is a passage in the article that could provide some answers. It
goes like this:
“The immigration question is a little like the question of adding
more states. Why, under a post-constitutional progressive regime in which state
governments are in thrall to federal policy, would any conservative want to add
more states to the union? Under the circumstances, adding more states would
make our structural problems with so-called 'cooperative federalism' worse,
since there's zero chance that any new state would resist federal money and the
strings attached to it”.
Davidson says that taking in immigrants is like adding more states
to the union. That's a bad thing, he asserts, because the new states take
federal money, even when it is doled out with strings attached. Thus,
Davidson's idea is that America does badly at instilling American values both
in its native-born and its new immigrants because it has adopted virtual states
that cost it money.
But who might be these virtual states? They are (1) Israel that
gobbles up billions of dollars year after year with no end in sight. (2) Taiwan
that requires the stationing of massive American fleets in the Pacific to
protect it at a time when China is a rising power, and costing America
increasingly more with the passage of time. And (3) Cuba whose refugees have
been pampered in America for decades, have prospered as a result, and have
engendered a new generation of Cuban Americans that's becoming progressive and
selfish like all the other native-born Americans.
But of the three virtual states, Israel is the one that has the
most powerful lobby. It is also the one that has formed a Fifth Column and
mandated it to operate at the federal and state levels in all fifty states of
the Union. In turn, the Fifth Column got busy sponging on America and giving to
Israel even when such “generosity” proved to reduce America's standing in the
world and lower the citizens' respect for their leaders at home. Now you look
at the following statement and wonder to whom it applies more readily:
“[They] want to eradicate the American constitutional system. That
they want to do so by gaining control of the levers of power is, if anything,
proof that they're serious––that they really mean what they say”.
And you conclude that Israel and the Jews form the part of the
story that John Daniel Davidson has neglected to tell.