Many anti-immigration activists are quick to say that their positions are not based on race. I understand the reason for such race denial in the present climate, and I know that many, maybe most, of these folks may really believe it, but I think this is sometimes said too quickly and too often and that this may have the effect of closing the minds of many people who might be better served by keeping their minds open so facts can come in.

We need to boldly, but politely, get past the fear of being called names. Are we just against "illegal immigration" as some people like to say? If that's true, then we should all be happy if President Bush makes all illegals, legal as he apparently wants to do. Somehow, I don't think that would make most of us happy. If not, why not? The answer is that illegal vs. legal is not the real issue. The real issue is that our society is being transformed into something different than it has been and this is being done through the invasion of our land by those who are upsetting the traditional genetic balance we have had in this country.

As we fearlessly (I hope) travel down this path of discussing the importance of genes to the immigration debate, we have to realize that admitting that there are genetic differences between different peoples is not the same thing as racial hatred or animosity any more than it is hatred or animosity when we admit that different makes of automobiles have different features or that different breeds of dogs have different abilities. We also have to understand that genetic differences are causes that lead to different effects in the resulting societies.

Few are saying it these days, but the U.S. became what it has become because its dominant genetic strain was European and it was a European nation, albeit in a new land. Different peoples, no less than different ants or birds, build their societies and the badges of their societies based on their genetic determinants as adapted to various environments and conditions (both internal and external). What the European immigrants built in America was a new Europe. It was a particular type of ant hive built by this particular type of human ant. Put the same humans in a million different lands, and they'd build the same basic things over and over again with various modifications dictated by circumstances and various other variables. It's part of their genes. That's why the nation prospered and became the world power it is today. America was not made great because of genetic diversity or multiculturalism or multiracialism; that's the stuff of grade school level propaganda. To think that genetic diversity is our strength, is to enter the lala land of the humanity denying liberal loonies with their noblesse oblige racism that, at its heart, posits all humans as being one size fits all white humans under the skin who are just dying to let their inner whiteness shine through their non-white skins and who just need the motherly and fatherly help of white skinned liberals to help them do this. We need to start seeing and respecting humans as they truly are, not as we want to pretend they are. We are all different, and not just because of different paint jobs.

Just as different peoples are not identical, they are also not fungible. You can't replace one group of genetically closely related people with another group of people who are not genetically closely related to the first group and expect the same results in society. To think you can do this is a little like thinking you can blithely substitute brown sugar for white sugar in a cake recipe and that you will end up with the same result.

Let's cut to it. Immigration is inextricably wrapped up with genes because humans and human populations are inextricably wrapped up with genes. It can be no other way. That's nature. That's reality. That's how living things are engineered. As living creatures we are all products or projections of our genes and it is our genes that have made us of different races and which have given us different abilities and talents and different instinctive approaches to this process we call life as surely as genes have done this with the aforementioned ants and birds.

When we consider these things, we are faced with the thought that well, yes, these "lower" creatures--these ants and birds--are programmed by their genes to have certain instincts, but we humans are higher creatures and we have free will. Well, in fact, we do not have as much free will as we arrogantly and vainly think we have. . We, too, are a product of our genes, and we, too, are directed by our genes. Twin studies clearly and convincingly, and sometimes head scratchingly so, demonstrate this.

What about that hoary saw: the melting pot? It's mostly nonsense in a genetic sense. When the term "melting pot"was coined, there wasn't much understanding of genetics and it referred to people from Ireland, England, France and all the other European countries coming here and melting together into an English speaking American. But, what was really melted together? Mostly just unessential nationalities and national customs and languages. Not genes. All of the European peoples were closely related genetically long before they came here. They were all white Europeans. They were of a very similar genotype and phenotype.

Fast forward to today when immigration is not primarily from white Europe, but from the brown Third World. Will a brown America be the same as a white America? Of course not. The genetic mix will determine the nature of the country, as it always has and as surely as the ingredients and their quantities in a recipe in a kitchen determines the nature of the meal. If current trends continue, we're going to be a brown Third World nation not a white First World nation. You may think this is a good thing, or you may think it is a bad thing, but that's where we're heading unless things change. And, it has little to do with illegal vs. legal immigration.

So, what does becoming a brown Third World nation mean in a practical sense? Well, just for the heck of it I grabbed some statistics on two states that I knew were different from each other genetically but which were similar in other important ways, such as income and population size, to see what a less white America promises. You can do the same thing for different states and will probably come up with even greater disparities, but here's what I came up with between New Mexico and Maine. New Mexico is the 39th most populous state and Maine is the 40th. If humans are fungible, you might expect to see similar violent crime rates among different populations. That's not what we see in these two states and its not what we see in any examples that I've ever seen. My guess is that if you took all the people of Maine and put them in New Mexico and you took all the people of New Mexico and put them in Maine that the violent crime rates of the two states would be reversed. It's not the geography that matters, but the people.

According to the 2000 Census, the estimated population of the state of Maine was 1,274,923 and it was 96.9% non-Hispanic white. The violent crime rate was a very low 109.6 per 100,000 people. This makes it the 49th most violent state.

Contrast that to the state of New Mexico with 1,819,046 residents and which was only 44.71% non-Hispanic white. The violent crime rate was a very high 757.9 per 100,000 people. This makes it the 4th most violent state.

As the percentage of whites in the population of America drops, so too, among many other things, will the crime free First World quality of life drop. Think not? Prove me wrong with facts and figures. I have an open mind, and I'm willing to listen to logical arguments. But, don't try to tell me that apples are the same as pears.

#  #  #