One step at a time: desperate families join migrant caravan | World news | The Guardian

Image result for migrant caravan

“Thousands are walking to US border, away from hunger and violence of Central America seemingly unaware of Trump’s hostility”

Source: One step at a time: desperate families join migrant caravan | World news | The Guardian

Following is a slightly edited version of my response to a friend’s posting of this link on her Facebook timeline:

I should be sorry if this costs me a friend, but I think it has to be said: whether you love our current President or hate him with a passion, a border-crashing convoy / caravan heading toward the United States is no laughing matter, and it is certainly not a cause for celebration. It is a serious and dangerous threat to our territorial integrity and national sovereignty. If you want to come here, there are ways to do so legally. This is not one of them!

And while I recognize and respect that some of them may be “desperate,” I rather doubt that they are any more desperate than the majority of human beings have been for the majority of human history (and prehistory). I feel sorry for them, but the U.S. is not the land of milk and honey, or the leprechaun’s pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. We are our own country, with our own problems, and our own people to take care of, and we’re not going to be able to do that as well (or even as poorly… 🙄) as we are, if this sort of thing becomes the norm.

One woman interviewed said she was 65 and couldn’t get a job. If she couldn’t get a job there, what is the chance that she’ll get a job here, where she doesn’t speak the language, doesn’t know the culture, has few if any contacts…? Are you – this is a collective “you,” I’m not specifying anyone in particular – willing to pay for her support, and that of her family, and that of many others in this caravan, out of your taxes? Is the daughter she’s trying to find even here legally, herself?

Again, if you want to come here, there are legal paths: if temporarily, on a work visa; if your intention is permanent, by applying for citizenship. On the subject of citizenship, I have to admit, I have little sympathy or respect for people who come here wanting all the economic benefits of living and working in the U.S., long-term, but are unwilling to accept the responsibilities that come with citizenship. It is also a slap in the face to the millions of legal immigrants who have done it the right way! Many of them are livid about things like this, and rightly so.

In any case, trying to crash the borders – even if you call it “peacefully opening” them – in a mass caravan is a recipe for disaster. No borders, no country. It is both the right and the responsibility of any nation to be very careful about who they let in, for the good of their existing citizens and for the well-being of the country as a whole. If there is anyone who genuinely thinks it would be a good idea to open the borders and turn immigration into a free-for-all, please think carefully through all of the implications. The result, if it were ever to happen, might not be so pleasant as some might imagine.

UPDATE: Associated Press reports,

“Migrants traveling in a mass caravan burst through a Guatemalan border fence and streamed by the thousands toward Mexican territory on Friday, defying Mexican authorities’ entreaties for an orderly crossing and U.S. President Donald Trump’s threats of retaliation.

“On the Mexican side of a border bridge, they were met by a phalanx of police with riot shields. About 50 managed to push their way through before officers unleashed pepper spray and the rest retreated.

“The gates were closed again, and police used a loudspeaker to address the masses, saying, ‘We need you to stop the aggression.'”

“Peacefully” opening the borders, eh…?

US admits lowest number of refugees in more than 40 years – CNNPolitics

The United States admitted 22,491 refugees in the last fiscal year – one of the lowest amounts on record.

Source: US admits lowest number of refugees in more than 40 years – CNNPolitics

“The United States admitted 22,491 refugees in the last fiscal year – one of the lowest amounts on record.

“The admissions count for the 2018 fiscal year, which ended on September 30, was less than half the number of refugees admitted in FY 2017 (53,716) and about one-quarter of the number of people admitted in FY 2016 (84,994). According to State Department records going back to 1975, the only year that the US admitted fewer refugees was 1977.

“A State Department spokesperson said the reduced number of admissions ‘was consistent with operational capacity to implement new screening and vetting procedures following Executive Order 13780, Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.'”


Let me be clear: we have a moral responsibility to assist those who are genuine refugees – albeit, with the goal of helping them to return to their countries of origin, if or when circumstances allow.

We also have a moral responsibility to distinguish between authentic refugees and those claiming “refugee” status as cover for their real intention, be that criminal or terrorist activity, or with the hope of becoming economic migrants.

In the case of the latter, we have a social (and arguably moral) responsibility to our own citizens, and to the nation as a whole, to ensure that only those who have a reasonable expectation of making a positive contribution to our nation’s economic and social well-being are allowed in: and coming in, or attempting to come in, under false pretenses is a pretty good example of a disqualifying factor.

Notwithstanding the signs carried by the people pictured above, the sentiments expressed are, at least, debatable; a nation with no borders – or porous borders – is not a nation at all. Good to see us finally standing up for our own sovereignty, once again!

The Dalai Lama vs. Pope Francis on Immigration – Dr. Steve Turley on YouTube

Source: The Dalai Lama vs. Pope Francis on Immigration!!! – Dr. Steve Turley | YouTube

Dr. Steve Turley is a YouTube personality (I guess if you have 67,000 followers you can be counted as one of those!), a conservative vlogger who is both prolific – posting two videos a day, each tending to run between ten and fifteen minutes, plus or minus – and relentlessly optimistic regarding the future of the West.

The latter is actually rather refreshing, in an atmosphere where many (myself included, on my worst days) tend to be prone to gloom-and-doom pessimism on the present cultural civil war, which constantly seems on the verge of slipping over into a “hot” war between the militant Left and those on the right who are becoming increasingly “mad as h___, and aren’t going to take this any more,” in the words of the famous 1978 movie scene.

At any rate, Turley seeks – in his own words – to “analyze current events in light of awesome conservative trends, so that you can personally and professionally flourish.” A bit of a “Renaissance man” (a direction in which I tend, myself), Turley’s PhD is from Durham University; he is the author of more than 20 books, teaches theology and rhetoric at Tall Oaks Classical School in Bear, DE, and serves as Professor of Fine Arts at Eastern University, a Christian university near Philadelphia, inter alia.

All of which is by way of a lead-in to say that he has the academic and professional chops to back what he says, and what he says is often interesting, and sometimes enlightening.  This video is certainly worth watching, and listening to.

“We are indeed living in bizarre times when a major Buddhist world leader is actually sounding more Christian than the Pope!”

We are indeed…

How to Think About Vladimir Putin | Imprimis,h_1234,x_73,y_41,c_crop,g_north_west/w_609,h_343,q_auto,c_fill,f_auto/

Our globalist leaders may have deprecated sovereignty since the end of the Cold War, but that does not mean it has ceased for an instant to be the primary subject of politics.

Source: How to Think About Vladimir Putin | Imprimis

Christopher Caldwell, a senior editor at The Weekly Standard, notes, “this is not going to be a talk about what to think about Putin, which is something you are all capable of making up your minds on, but rather how to think about him,” and continues,

“Our globalist leaders may have deprecated sovereignty since the end of the Cold War, but that does not mean it has ceased for an instant to be the primary subject of politics.

“Vladimir Vladimirovich is not the president of a feminist NGO. He is not a transgender-rights activist. He is not an ombudsman appointed by the United Nations to make and deliver slide shows about green energy. He is the elected leader of Russia — a rugged, relatively poor, militarily powerful country that in recent years has been frequently humiliated, robbed, and misled. His job has been to protect his country’s prerogatives and its sovereignty in an international system that seeks to erode sovereignty in general and views Russia’s sovereignty in particular as a threat.

“By American standards, Putin’s respect for the democratic process has been fitful at best… Yet if we were to use traditional measures for understanding leaders, which involve the defense of borders and national flourishing, Putin would count as the pre-eminent statesman of our time.”

In short, Putin is doing what a national leader should do: looking out for the best interests of his country, and his people. Those of us who admire him, admire him for that reason – not because we think we will always agree with him, or are naive enough to think that the interests of Russia will always be congruent with those of the West, or America in particular.

When our interests are opposed, we should act accordingly – though not in a knee-jerk or foolish way. We need to exercise rationality, discernment, and discretion, none of which seem to be strong suits of the contemporary Left.

But we need not, and should not, view him – or the Russian Federation – as an enemy, or an adversary, or even necessarily and always as a rival. There will be many times when our interests are common, or at least complementary. When that is the case, we should also act accordingly. And it is certainly foolish, and dangerous, to ratchet up the tension unnecessarily, or for domestic political reasons.

[My suspicion is that the American Left is simply congenitally incapable of believing that they lost the election – all by themselves, by their own words and actions; that a sufficiently large percentage of the American voters flatly rejected the Democratic candidate, Party, and platform to hand an electoral victory to the current President… so the outcome must have been the result of Russian meddling. It’d be silly if it wasn’t so sad – and so dangerous.]

The Russian Federation may not be the superpower that the old Soviet Union was, but it is certainly a Great Power – a very great power: large, populous, and militarily powerful – and must be respected as such. And its President should be respected as a strong and capable leader who takes his country’s interests seriously, as any good leader should do.


Do you appreciate and/or enjoy these posts, and want to support The Anglophilic Anglican in my defense of Western Christendom, and enjoyment of Western culture and civilization?

Then please consider supporting me on Patreon!

Many thanks in advance.