“The degree of cultural diversity that [immigration] introduces to this country is rather like the cultural diversity we had in the 19th century, and for that matter in the 18th century at the time of founding,” observed American Enterprise Institute political scientist Charles Murray. In many ways, according to Murray, diversity has been a positive force throughout American history. . . . A few decades ago, many analysts warned that these demographic trends would lead to balkanization of America. However, most experts now agree that U.S. culture and assimilation will reinforce America’s national character. . . .” Voice of America, Experts: Coming Demographic Shift Will Strengthen U.S. Culture 3/31/15.
Fact Check: Two basic groups want mass immigration, conservatives who view it as a source of cheap labor, and leftists who view it as a source of cheap votes. To give legitimacy to their selfish and unpatriotic schemes they endlessly push the mantra that “diversity is our strength.” They never explain why this is so, hoping that repetition of this propaganda phrase will numb the common sense that strength lies in unity.
The claim that we had something like modern-day diversity at our founding is patently absurd. One of our Founding Fathers, John Jay, said Providence had blessed the new country with unity, “a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs. . . .”
This began to change in the 19th century with the waves of mass immigration, and the ensuing diversity caused many problems. Nevertheless, there were a number of factors working to bring a significant degree of unity. Despite their differences from the native population, a commonality of both groups was that they were predominately Christian and of European background. The bond of Western culture and civilization united them, and provided a basis for assimilation.
American society at that time was confident of its values and demanded assimilation in its schools and other public institutions. In the 1920s, Congress substantially reduced immigration, which further promoted assimilation. It also enabled immigrants to start moving up the economic ladder, by ending the wage-suppressing effect of continued immigration. In a few decades they and their descendants were entering the middle-class and full assimilation.
Immigration today and in recent decades has been far different. Much of it has come from Latin America, particularly Mexico. That country with its Indian heritage is significantly non-Western, and many of its people bear historic grudges against the United States. Today, assimilation is not enforced as it was in the past. Indeed, many of our elites openly mock the idea that immigrants should change their ways and openly promote the ideal of multi-culturalism as opposed to Americanism.
The elites maintain that “all cultures are equal and equally enriching.” But if that’s the case, why do immigrants feel the need to flee the consequences of their home cultures? Without assimilation they will establish those cultures here. If we were to cut immigration sharply, as we did nearly 100 years ago, perhaps assimilation could proceed, and maybe immigrants could begin moving toward the American Dream. To a large degree this isn’t happening, and with our immigration policy we continue to import more poverty.
The consequences are an increasingly fragmented, contentious, and alienated people without a common core of identity. Those who claim otherwise are not “experts,” they are cheap propagandists and nothing more.