More Misinformation from the Media:
San Francisco is one of the most progressive cities in the nation, especially when it comes to national immigration. We believe so much in the natural right of people to join us here in America that we fought to keep our status as a sanctuary city, even in the face of being federally defunded for it. We pride ourselves on our rejection of plans to tighten immigration controls and deport undocumented immigrants. . . . If we in San Francisco so strongly believe that national immigration is a human right, then it seems strange to block migration into our own neighborhoods. – SF Supports Immigrants—Just Not into our Neighborhoods, San Francisco Chronicle, Vincent Woo, 12/12/16. Link here.
Fact Check: Progressive is a fine sounding word, but it only has value in terms of where its progress goes. Progress over a cliff is no good at all, and the same may be said of the political label “progressive,” which is really just another name for radical left-wing ideology. One thing nearly all progressives agree upon is unswerving devotion to mass immigration.
According to author Woo, it is a “natural right” for anyone who wants to come to move here. Really? And just where does this alleged right come from? Mainly, it seems, from the thin air of their rarified ideology. To the contrary, rights that are real and down-to-earth are those of American citizens who are constitutionally entitled to decide what kind of society they wish to have. And this most definitely includes the right to maintain their national character and way of life.
With no restrictions on immigration we certainly would lose any semblance of what America is today, and the change most definitely would not be for the better. An international Gallup poll found that 150 million foreigners would like to move to the United States. Because they would no doubt bring their immediate family members with them, as well as some extended family members, the total of arrivals could reach half-a-billion.
Can any reasonable person imagine that an inundation of this magnitude—or even close to it—would not be a disaster for us? What would it do to our environment, the economic prospects of our working people, and our national cohesion?
Progressives ignore these questions for what appear to be two reasons. Many of them, with their upper-class status, live in gilded ghettos far removed from the maddening diversity they wish to inflict on everyone else. They can live in dream worlds because they can afford them. Other progressives, of the more hard-core variety, are far more sinister. They know full well that mass immigration brings distress and upheaval, and that’s precisely why they support it. With society in chaos, they can advance their revolutionary agenda—a strategy documented by author William Hawkins in his book Importing Revolution.
In any case, Vincent Woo deserves credit for calling the first group of progressives to live up to their professed ideals. He notes that many of them in San Francisco use various legal ordinances to keep diversity out of their neighborhoods. One hopes his idea will catch on. If progressives have to experience what they advocate, they might stop being progressives.