Schlafly: Partisanship Over Principle, Always


Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum has a new report offering advice to the Republican party on how to handle the immigration issue. Not only do they not want them to support immigration reform of any kind, they think the GOP should try to cut legal immigration in half as well.

Phyllis Schlafly, one of the strongest proponents of the theory that the Republican Party can survive simply by solidifying its base of white voters, is out with a new report arguing that all the GOP needs to do to thrive is to cut legal immigration in half.

In the report, Eagle Forum argues that immigrants – particularly Latino and Asian-American immigrants — are inherently “leftist,” drawn to “the left’s race-based grievance politics,” and reliant on the country’s “racial spoils system and a huge welfare state,” and so therefore legal immigration should be dramatically reduced in order to save the Republican Party.

The report backs Schlafly’s idea – echoed by groups such as the Center for Immigration Studies and activists such as Pat Buchanan – that the Republican Party shouldn’t bother trying to become “ welcoming and inclusive” (particularly through immigration reform) but instead stir up racial hostility in order to solidify its hold among white voters. Unsurprisingly, this theory was first laid out by a prominent white nationalist writer before it hit the big time.

Notice there is no discussion at all of what is best for the country, what is more fair and just, or anything else. It’s all about partisan politics. Nothing else matters.

Comments

  1. Chiroptera says

    i think this is a good proposal. I’m tired of immigrants coming into this country and desecrating our patriotic songs with their foreign languages.

  2. says

    drawn to “the left’s race-based grievance politics,” and reliant on the country’s “racial spoils system and a huge welfare state,” and so therefore legal immigration should be dramatically reduced in order to save the Republican Party.

    As Sadlyno would say, “It’s always projection”.

    Notice there is no discussion at all of what is best for the country, what is more fair and just, or anything else. It’s all about partisan politics.”

    What’s best for angry, scared, ignorant, aged white people is what’s good for the country.

  3. kevinalexander says

    I think she has a point. America’s been going downhill ever since they started letting those illegal immigrants from Africa four hundred years ago.

  4. roggg says

    I agree strongly with Schlafly and the Eagle Forum. The GOP should come out strongly against immigration or any policy that helps non-rich and non-whites. muhahaha!

  5. eric says

    Phyllis Schlafly…is out with a new report arguing that all the GOP needs to do to thrive is to cut legal immigration in half.

    That’s not going to go over well with business/wall street side of the GOP. That’s right, Silicon Valley, Schlafly says you can no longer import tech workers.

  6. eamick says

    I think she has a point. America’s been going downhill ever since they started letting those illegal immigrants from Africa four hundred years ago.

    How about the ones from Europe approximately 450 years ago?

  7. says

    She needs to get with the times and update her stereotypes. The modern stereotype is that Asians make their kids study 8 hours a day so they can all become doctors and bankers. She still seems to be stuck on some variation of the old Yellow Peril type arguments.

  8. says

    timgueguen “She still seems to be stuck on some variation of the old Yellow Peril type arguments.”
    Back when I was a child, every time I watched it I cried at the end of Old Yeller Peril. Sure, it comes across as racist now, but you try not to cry when Travis says “I’ll do it, Pa. He’s my Asian-American.”

  9. felidae says

    Old joke updated: An Indian chief celebrating his 100th birthday is brought to the White House Obama asks the chief if he has any advice for leading the American people since the chief has been leading his people for so long.
    The chief thinks a minute and replies “Be careful with your immigration policy”

  10. jnorris says

    Ms Schlafly:

    … all the GOP needs to do to thrive is to cut legal immigration in half.

    I agree, people like Gov Mitt Romney’s father and Senators Cruz and Rubio should be kept out.

  11. martinc says

    eric @ 8:

    That’s not going to go over well with business/wall street side of the GOP. That’s right, Silicon Valley, Schlafly says you can no longer import tech workers.

    Sorry to make a big point out of a little one, but I think that won’t work. The trouble with the idea that people will see the downside of cutting immigration by seeing it affect the people they know and employ is that people don’t associate “cut immigration” in terms of the immigrants they know and employ, it applies to the faceless ones they don’t know or employ. This was pointed out long ago in a much darker context by Heinrich Himmler:

    “This is something that is easily said: “The Jewish people will be exterminated”, says every Party member, “this is very obvious, it is in our program — elimination of the Jews, extermination, a small matter.” And then they turn up, the upstanding 80 million Germans, and each one has his decent Jew. They say the others are all pigs, but this particular one is a splendid Jew.”

    So modusoperandi’s facetious comment @ 12 – “I’ll do it, Pa. He’s my Asian-American” – actually doesn’t apply, because it’s not ‘my immigrant’ people apply this thinking to. It is perfectly possible for the wealthy to cheer for cutting immigration while making money employing immigrants, because it hasn’t been brought home to them that those are the immigrants referred to. Schlafly can use a glib phrase like “cut immigration in half” and everyone will assume it is the other half who will be cut, not their “decent” and “splendid” immigrants.

  12. eric says

    Martinc:

    Sorry to make a big point out of a little one, but I think that won’t work. The trouble with the idea that people will see the downside of cutting immigration by seeing it affect the people they know and employ is that people don’t associate “cut immigration” in terms of the immigrants they know and employ, it applies to the faceless ones they don’t know or employ.

    You’re thinking of the opinions of the large majority of GOP voters. I’m inclined to agree with you about them. However, I was really referring to the much smaller minority of active business donors to the GOP; the folk who own large corporations and care very much about how easy/hard it is to get cheap, professional labor for their own corporate benefit. Those folks are smart, self-interested, understand exactly the issues, and they’re big donors. Schlafly antagonizing them is a risk not because of the number votes the party might lose but because they are not likely to monetarily support candidates that announce they will cut off the stream of H-1B visas and the like.

  13. caseloweraz says

    Great Caesar’s ghost — a report from the Eagle Forum supports Phyllis Schlafly’s ideas!

    What’s this world coming to when stable, solid organizations can philosophically turn on a dime like that?

    /sarc

Leave a Reply