by Yuri Low-Interest Loanberg
If you’re an immigration restrictionist and have spent any time debating an open borders activist, you have undoubtedly heard them quote “The New Colossus,” the poem on the Statue of Liberty, which reads in part:
“‘Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!’ cries she
With silent lips. ‘Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!’”
There are several flaws with this argument. The first is that at no point in American history was “The New Colossus” law. The poem was placed on the Statue of Liberty because the brilliant people in Congress did not allocate money for the pedestal, so a fundraiser was held by auctioning off pieces of poetry, and the people in attendance decided to put “The New Colossus” on the pedestal, thus divorcing it from any real meaning to the people or their rulers who had no input in the decision to bolt on some random scribble on America’s most recognizable symbol.
The Nationality Act of 1790 was the actual law, and it stated that “Citizenship shall be limited to free white persons of good character” who had been living in America for two or more years. Soon after, the Naturalization Act of 1790 was repealed and replaced by the Naturalization Act of 1795, increasing the amount of time needed to stay in the United States to five or more years to get citizenship. There were a small handful of immigration and naturalization laws passed afterward, but they were mostly minor administrative changes.
The next big legal change to immigration was the 1924 Natural Origins Act. This piece of legislation required that immigrants could only come in proportion to the percentage of that nationality which was already here. For example, if a certain percent of the country hailed from Scotland, then we would have to ensure that a similar percentage of immigrants we let in that year had to be from Scotland. In other words, for most of American history the legal and moral objective was to keep persons of Northern European heritage as the supermajority.
The first attempt to turn America into a multicultural state was in 1952 with the McCarran-Walter Immigration and Naturalization Act which would have allowed immigration from previously restricted areas. It was vetoed by President Truman who called the Act “un-American” and in his lengthy explanation of why he cited the 1924 National Origins Act as the gold standard of immigration and naturalization legislation. The legislation was unfortunately overridden and America was one step closer to entering the camp of the saints. Fortunately the McCarran-Walter act was not a death blow to America’s White super majority because it required seventy-five percent of immigrants to be from Germany, Ireland, and Great Britain. Allowing in incompatible people from exotic parts of the world did, unfortunately help lay the foundation for America’s destruction.
The 1965 Hart-Celler Immigration and Naturalization Act is what led to America being slowly dissolved by allowing in exotic peoples with little to no cultural, linguistic, ethnic, or religious commonality with the American founding stock. It is worth noting that the voting public at that time was told it would not change the demographics of the United States and the Hart-Celler Act was slowly implemented over the course of half a decade, not taking full effect until 1970. This delay allowed President Johnson to destroy the country and not face any of the consequences because if the Hart-Celler Act was fully implemented immediately, there would have been a good chance that the country would have demanded the legislation be immediately repealed. The fact that Johnson knew the legislation would have angered many Americans and permanently changed the American character means the cynical bastard was a traitor that did more damage to this once-great country than Aldrich Ames and Benedict Arnold combined, and he got away with it.
The Statue of Liberty was not erected to greet new immigrants. It was a gift from France to congratulate us on victory over Britain. The shackles on her ankles represent independence from British oppression, and France has a similar Statue of Liberty facing America to symbolize the friendship between our two countries. The notion that the French statue is supposed to be welcoming new immigrants is so self-evidently absurd that I feel no need to debunk it. But what if I am wrong and the statue is supposed to be welcoming immigrants? The statue is facing Europe, but specifically France so it would seem that if we are to operate under that assumption, we should only allow ethnic French and their diaspora. If these are the circumstances that we are to operate under, then open the flood gates and enrich us with French Culture!