Elections are reliable greenhouses of lugubriosity. Every four years the losing side laments civilization’s now-certain demise, and then gets up and goes to work like every other morning (or at least spends their EBT funds in a typical manner). Most things don’t markedly change, or do so gradually enough that whites hardly notice they’ve been dispossessed. There’s a natural rhythm to the waves in an election’s wake. Democrat victories are accompanied by practically no conciliatory gestures to the other half of the country. There is instead a consistent advance of the left’s agenda and increasing foreign infusions to their voter rolls. But liberals could honestly say the same about the results of a Republican win: consistent advance of the left’s agenda and increasing foreign infusions to their voter rolls. No one has a monopoly on the moral high ground.
So while all elections are critical to advancing liberalism and replacing the country’s founding stock, this one felt more urgent than any before. From my view, this is the first election where the faded sheen of principles and politics gave way to the bitter identity attacks that have always been veiled behind them. Liberals stopped hating conservatives and started hating whites.
This has, of course, always been their modern motivating impulse; though in 2016 it became overt. Liberals agreed, “We’re all Tim Wise now.” For their part, conservatives finally began to realize that tribal conflict doesn’t evaporate no matter how much you ignore it. It doesn’t matter if you don’t care about race, when those other races do.
And so despite the narcotic effects of bouncy-ball and Budweiser, even whites in higher latitudes began to sense the existential import of this election. It wasn’t about tax rates anymore. That’s why all of the gibbering over Trump’s temperament and lack of chivalry with the fairer sex came to nothing. National Review and the nevertrumps thought this was another game of bridge, while voters on both sides perceived it as war. And in the trenches no one gives a damn about niceties.
In a homogenous society, cultured and genteel candidates can debate abstractions and decimal points. In a diverse society, multiple nations within one country fight bitterly for control of the state. This fight rarely remains limited to rhetoric. Which is another way of saying the now nightly arc of Molotov cocktails toward a militarized police cordon is “our strength.”
If Trump doesn’t understand the underlying contours of this conflict, I’m hopeful his chief policy strategist Steve Bannon does. Given the hysterical flailing from the left at his appointment I like to think that faith isn’t overly optimistic. Trump needs both ears oriented far away from conciliatory cucktitude, and his mind kept firmly on strategic advancement. Does this strengthen my constituencies or weaken my opponents? should be the first question he asks himself before considering any issue.
One of the first of his many battles will be on the field of Sanctuary Cities. The left is already limbering its guns.
Defying Trump, Chicago will continue as immigrant sanctuary.
Actually “Trump” is not a law in the federal register. And that’s what Chicago is defying.
Joining other cities around the country, Chicago is pledging to remain a sanctuary city for undocumented immigrants, an act of defiance in the face of Donald Trump’s past promise to cut off those cities from federal funding.
In sanctuary cities, local law enforcement officials aren’t required to alert U.S. Immigration and Customs authorities about the immigration status of individuals with whom they come in contact.
On Monday, Chicago’s elected officials, including Mayor Rahm Emanuel, are expected to hold a news conference to formally discuss how the city will retain its sanctuary status. Aldermen are expected to call on Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner to pressure Trump to back off his vow to interfere with funding.
“Across the country and in Chicago and Illinois … young men and women [are] very distraught about this,” Chicago Alderman Danny Solis told POLITICO Illinois on Sunday.
Illinois Comptroller-elect Susana Mendoza, whose parents are Mexican immigrants, called on Rauner to take a stand on the issue.
“As a leader of this state, the governor, and everyone in a leadership position, should be saying it’s wrong,” Mendoza told POLITICO Illinois on Sunday. “I would expect that the governor would say, ‘that’s ridiculous.’ Besides moral bankruptcy, it’s bad fiscal policy for the city or any city.”
The move is largely motivated by elected officials who say they’ve heard from terrified residents, including so-called Dreamers (children whose parents entered the country illegally), who fear imminent deportation. On Sunday, Emanuel’s office released a statement directing those with questions or in need of legal resources to call 311.
“I want to assure all of our families that Chicago is and will remain a sanctuary city,” Emanuel said in a statement. “Chicago has been a city of immigrants since it was founded. We have always welcomed people of all faiths and backgrounds, and while the administration will change, our values and our commitment to inclusion will not.”
Since Tuesday’s election, other cities that have affirmed their commitment to remaining sanctuaries include New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, Philadelphia and San Francisco.
So the point is if young men and women are very distraught then they are relieved of any compliance obligations to federal law. That’s one criterion. The other is if the law in question is “wrong,” “ridiculous,” or “bad fiscal policy” it may be ignored by the states without consequence so long as they are above the Mason-Dixon Line. So remember when starting your open organized crime syndicate: RICO laws are ridiculous!
One can imagine the bloodcurdling howls from leftist squatter advocates if majority white towns began to similarly name themselves “Freedom of Association Cities” where federal civil rights laws and related judicial fiats were openly dismissed (as bad fiscal policy). Though we don’t have to actually imagine this at all. Both presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy set a fairly resolute precedent in dispatching federal troops to enforce Washington’s requirements, without any apparent regard for how distraught it made the young men and women at the end of a bayonet.
There is a huge reservoir of heartland contempt for the festering metro catch-basins that have pompously flouted immigration law for years. If Trump can’t even drain these shallow cesspits, then I’m afraid the vast Washington swamp is well beyond his capacity.
Though liberals will rely as always on media organ optics for their squid ink. If Trump cuts off federal funding, then roving CNN cameras will capture the last rasping breaths of migrants falling like flies in the streets of Chicago. The fact that each was just shot by blacks will hardly be relevant to the narrative that TRUMP IS KILLING BROWN PEOPLE. Alternatively he could send in the troops, which would be literally Hitler unless they torched Knoxville on the way. The last option would be to pursue the issue in the courts, which has largely been the source of our country’s misery from the outset. And in the likely event a militant panel sided with their affiliates in the cities, he is then left hanging in the wind.
The law, his constituents, and past precedent are all on Trump’s side. The left has only racist. I think we’ll learn early in this administration how potent that weapon remains.