There is another fundamental transformation of the United States taking place besides the one that will happen with Obamacare. That other transformation is the one caused by illegal immigration, especially illegal immigration from Mexico.
Recently, it was proposed that we
no longer use the term "illegal immigrant" to describe this invasion of Mexicans because the term is too judgmental. This is the position of Charles Patrick Garcia.
Matters of judgment aside, it is clear that illegal immigrants from Mexico are more like colonists than immigrants. We need a new way to describe this social phenomenon. Nowadays, the term "Mexicólonos" describes illegal immigrants from Mexico better than any other.
The late professor Samuel P. Huntington
was aware of how the conflict between Mexicólonos and US citizens would produce a clash of civilizations. Huntington saw Mexico as a torn state, a state torn between a ruling class that wished to be modern and an indigenous class that wished to go back to its pre-Colombian past.
Huntington also recognized there was a cultural fault line between the United States and Mexico, between Latin culture and Anglo culture. These cultural differences go back to the differences between England and Spain with the added difference of the indigenous Aztecs in Mexico.
Writing in Foreign Policy, Huntington states the problem of Hispanic immigration to the United States very forcefully. “The persistent inflow of Hispanic immigrants threatens to divide the United States into two peoples, two cultures, and two languages.”
“Mexicans…have not assimilated into mainstream U.S. culture, forming instead their own political and linguistic enclaves--from Los Angeles to Miami--and rejecting the Anglo-Protestant values
that built the American dream.”
Huntington then adds
a prediction for the future. “Mexican immigration is a unique, disturbing, and looming challenge to our cultural integrity, our national identity, and potentially to our future as a country. “
An understanding of the symbols on the Mexican flag helps to point out the cultural differences between the United States and Mexico that Huntington wanted us to know about.
The central figure in the center of the Mexican flag represents a mythical event in the history of the Aztecs. The symbol depicts an eagle perched on a prickly pear cactus devouring a snake.
These symbols, like the swastika, have a long history. Today, the symbols on the Mexican flag signify for many Mexicans not only the past Aztec empire, but also the future empire of Aztlán.
When Hernán Cortés and his army entered the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan they were shocked by the skulls and human sacrifices they saw. They were as shocked as US troops were when they entered the concentration camp of Auschwitz last century.
When we go deeper into the history of Mexico, we learn that the Aztecs were the only known civilization to have had state sponsored cannibalism. The Aztecs were also renowned for the
brutal rites of human sacrifice they practiced. One has to question if Aztec symbols are the kinds of symbols a modern nation wants on its flag.
In spite of this past, the horrors perpetuated by the Aztecs have been sanitized by the modern nation of Mexico. When Mexicans view a football game at the Estado Azteca, do they know the history of human sacrifice practiced by the Aztecs? When Europeans see a broadcast from this stadium would they be as accepting of a stadium in Germany named the Hitler Soccer Field?
The Aztec symbols on the Mexican flag have not gone unnoticed by some Americans. Writing in the George Heritage Council, Steve Mason holds strong
views about the Mexican flag. Mason writes, “The Mexican flag…is a symbol of War, Imperialism, Conquest, and Satanic belief.”
The seeds of Aztec culture are now being transplanted in the United States by the Mexicólonos. George H. Wittman refers to Mexico as the enemy next door. He writes in the American Spectator about the violence coming to the United States as a result of Mexico’s human and drug trafficking.
Wittman claims, “…the Obama Administration has continued a policy of avoiding recognition of the
danger of the open warfare that exists immediately south of the United States...”
The colonization of the United States has gone so far that it's just assumed US citizens must adapt to Mexican culture. This assumption is evident if you spend a week watching Univision, the Spanish language TV station broadcast throughout the United States.
With their motto, “A tu lado,” (At your side), Univision is clearly not at the side of those who want immigrants to the United States to speak English and assimilate. Nor do Univision’s news anchor speak the word “illegal” when they talk about Mexican illegal immigration. Univision seems to be at the side of those who break US immigration laws.
The corporate sponsors of Univision, sponsors like Ford and Comcast, seem comfortable with a Spanish-speaking nation superimposed upon the United States. Univision and its reporters end up being no better than fifth columnist if they cannot argue for assimilation and stand against illegal immigration.
Corporate executives often do not make good anthropologists. They do not recognize the cultural conflicts that come along with increased profits. Consider the case of Cargill in Illinois.
In their report, Mary Wisniewski and Christine Stebbins write about Beardstown, Illinois. This Illinois town where a Cargill meatpacking plant is located has been transformed by Mexicólonos.
Wisniewski and Stebbins note, "This has created challenges for small communities like Beardstown, which first had to adapt to one new language--Spanish and a mostly Mexican culture,” said Mark Grey, professor of anthropology at the University of Northern Iowa."
What is
off kilter here is the assumption that the residents of Beardstown, "had to adapt to one new language--Spanish and a mostly Mexican culture." Shouldn’t it be the other way around? The new workers in Beardstown should have adapted to US culture and English.
Adding insult to injury, the ongoing invasion of the United States by Mexicólonos is funded by US taxpayers. “More than half of the illegal immigrant families in many states
are on welfare--as many as 62 percent in Arizona--and they’re getting the taxpayer-funded benefits through their American-born children, Judicial Watch reports.”
The policy changes needed to prevent war with Mexico and the fundamental transformation of the United States by Mexicólonos will not be implemented by either of the two major political parties in the United States any time soon.
Democrats want the United States to be fundamentally transformed, so they will not resist the Mexicólonos. The amnesty recently ordered by Obama is proof of that. Republicans will not talk about any policy that may cost them Latino votes.
Furthermore, the division in Republican politics noted by Pat Buchanan between the conservatives and the neocons is highlighted by the party’s confused stand on immigration.
If it is, as neocons believe, that the United States is a creedal nation, then the neocons position on amnesty and increased immigration must be reexamined. The fact is that the Mexicólonos do not adhere to a US creed, and have no desire to do so,
When it comes to immigration, conservatives argue that a nation is not only a creed but also a culture and a history. A nation lives in the hearts of men. If the flag of Mexico is any indication, Mexicólonos have the Aztecs in their heart.
Regrettably, just writing about the transformation of the United States by Mexicólonos changes very little. The best solution to our illegal immigration problems, after we secure our southern border, remains a three-pronged approach: Deportation, deportation and deportation.
