E Pluribus Unum: An Immigrant’s Plea to America

As an immigrant to America, I have a lot to be grateful for. I will eternally express my gratitude to this nation for accepting me and giving me the life that I am living now. Millions of other immigrants can say the same. They have been able to come from all parts of the world and fulfill their dreams. This sentiment has been used to justify multiculturalism. We are repeatedly told that America is “a nation of immigrants.” However, that is not what America is. America was always meant to be an outpost of Europe, based on Western European traditions and English common law. As one would expect, immigrants who came to America were mostly from Europe. The immigration policy of the United States after 1965 has allowed for people from vastly different and even antithetical cultures to enter our country by the millions. Our porous border with Mexico has allowed for millions more from a backwards culture to enter America. As I said in my very first post, I want to preserve the America that my family came to enjoy. I do not want to see the character of the United States to change as a result of different cultures being allowed in. I do not want my parents’ sacrifice to be in vain. In order to preserve our country, we must do away with this notion that America is “a nation of immigrants” and return to our European roots.

First, a little personal history. I moved to America when I was 11 months old. I was born in Hyderabad, India. My parents were born and raised in that city. My father married my mother and got a job in Cleveland. He sent for me and my mother in 1994. We later moved to Chicago, where I have lived since 1997. My parents made the journey from India and chose to become Americans.

In one generation, my father went from a modest living in India to an upper middle class life here in America. No other country could have offered him that opportunity. America is truly a beacon of hope for all the ambitious, risk-taking people in the world who want to make an name for themselves.

What I admire the most about this country is that we all have the ability to create our own path in life. The right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” is what allows me to forge my own path. This country was the first in human history to put those words on paper. I am only one of millions and millions of immigrants who have benefitted from that profound declaration of human rights.

While I say all of this with pride, I realize that America is not actually “a nation of immigrants.” It is a creation of British and Dutch settlers. There was no America that existed before they came. Therefore, they were not immigrants. North America was an unnamed continent filled with warring tribes when they arrived. Moreover, the land had been tragically emptied of native inhabitants due to disease. When the English and Dutch arrived, they brought with them Protestantism, European culture and English common law. Those settlers designed America around those values. When America declared independence, the colonists used their common heritage to unite themselves to fight a war.

E pluribus unum was the motto suggested by the committee Congress appointed on July 4, 1776 to design “a seal for the United States of America.” The motto’s purpose is to express the theme of a seal’s imagery – especially that of the shield. That original committee also submitted a sketch of a seal. The center section of the shield had six symbols for “the Countries from which these States have been peopled”: the rose (England), thistle (Scotland), harp (Ireland), fleur-de-lis (France), lion (Holland), and an imperial eagle (Germany). Notice how all the countries that “peopled” the states were Northern and Western European. The United States was meant to be an extension of Europe. America’s legal system was founded in accordance with English common law. Although the original seal was not approved, their motto was. Pluribus Unum alludes to the union between the states and the federal government. It is not an endorsement of multiculturalism. The lie of the United States being “a nation of immigrants” was created to make the new immigrants in the late 19th and early 20th centuries feel more comfortable. America was built by a people with a largely common ancestry and religion. John Jay wrote favorably about America’s common ancestry in Federalist No. 2. He was delighted that “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs.” Jay saw the lack of diversity in America as a literal blessing. America, since its inception, expected its immigrants to conform to its English and Protestant roots so that her traditions can be preserved.

Benjamin Franklin wrote about this at length in a private letter to Peter Collinson in May of 1753. He was alarmed by the large number of German immigrants who were coming into Pennsylvania. Franklin observed how “not being used to Liberty, they know not how to make a modest use of it.” Their culture was completely different to the English and Dutch who had originally settled in the colony. “They are under no restraint of Ecclesiastical Government,” and were submissive to the civil government since they were still a minority. Franklin was also fearful of the lack of assimilation on the part of the German immigrants. “Few of their children in the Country learn English; they import many Books from Germany; and of the six printing houses in the Province, two are entirely German, two half German half English, and but two entirely English; Advertisements intended to be general are now printed in Dutch and English; the Signs in our Streets have inscriptions in both languages, and in some places only German.” As Germans from an alien culture and language moved into the colonies, they did not choose to assimilate, but rather set up a parallel society that was slowly displacing the original English settlers. Franklin warned that “in short unless the stream of their importation could be turned from this to other colonies, as you (Collinson) very judiciously propose, they will soon so out number us, that all the advantages we have will not in My Opinion be able to preserve our language, and even our Government will become precarious.” He “prayed God long to preserve to Great Britain the English Laws, Manners, Liberties and Religion” in the face of the waves of German immigration. Franklin’s opposition to the importation of large numbers of Germans into the colonies is really a refutation of multiculturalism.

The English and German cultures did not coexist, but ended up conflicting with each other. They did not live harmoniously as the multiculturalists would theorize. “The French who watch all advantages, are now themselves making a German settlement back of us in the Ilinoes Country, and by means of those Germans they may in time come to an understanding with ours, and indeed in the last war our Germans shewed a general disposition that seems to bode us no good.” The Germans showed an in-group preference for themselves rather than all members of the colony. They would not side with the English in a conflict “except a very few in proportion to their numbers.” The Germans’ loyalty lied with their fellow Germans rather than their English neighbors.

I use Franklin’s letter to demonstrate how immigration, when uncontrolled, can lead to conflict and displacement of the native population. This is especially true when the immigrants come from an alien or antithetical culture. The United States, since 1965 has changed its immigration policy from primarily bringing in white Europeans to bringing in people from the third world. Ann Coulter does a great job of showing the demographic shift that has occurred in her book Adios, America: The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole. Coulter says that “even in 1990, half the American population could trace its roots back to the white and black populace in 1790.” Until Ted Kennedy’s immigration bill, America was never less than 99% white Western European and West African black. African Americans are every bit a part of Anglo-Saxon America as the Anglo-Saxons themselves. Before 1965, America was a biracial country which followed European traditions.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 changed the demographics of this country enormously. The bill eliminated national origin, race, and ancestry as basis for immigration. It was the first time in US history that immigration from the Western hemisphere was limited. According to the Pew Research Center, in 1960, America was 85% white, 11% black, 3.5% hispanic and 0.6% Asian. By 2011, those numbers had changed to 63% white, 12% black, 17% hispanic and 5% asian. By the year 2050, if current trends continue, there will be no majority ethnic group in America. Clearly, the shift in immigration policy has led to a huge increase in the hispanic and asian populations in America. Most noticeably, the percentage of the population that whites make up has dropped precipitously. According to the Migration Policy Institute, the ten largest U.S. immigrant groups in 1960 came from: Poland, Soviet Union, United Kingdom, Austria, Canada, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy and Mexico. In 2014, only Mexico remained in the top ten. The new list was: Philippines, Vietnam, China, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Korea and Mexico.

The reason such a shift in demographics was orchestrated was because the Democrat party wanted a stream of reliable voters to enter the country. Over the last few decades, a majority of whites have never voted from the Democrats in a presidential election. The Democrats understood that if whites continued to make up 85% of the population, they would be at a serious disadvantage in elections in the future. Ted Kennedy came to their rescue with his immigration bill to import voters from the third world who are more likely to vote for leftist policies. For example, according to the 2010 National Annenberg Election Survey, 67% of hispanic immigrants and 59% of asian immigrants favor government health insurance. This is compared to only 45% of native born Americans. According to the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, 63% of hispanic immigrants and 64% of asian immigrants support Affirmative Action. Only 35% of native born Americans favor it. With regards to Obamacare, 69% of all immigrants supported it.

If the Democrats continue to succeed, their policies will divide the country along racial and cultural lines, much like Pennsylvania was becoming divided during Benjamin Franklin’s time. The United States will eventually end up with various ethnic groups squabbling with each other over what the government can offer them. This is the “precarious” situation that Franklin described. We will lose our national identity and face a future where Western values are diluted away. To avoid this, I think we should first deport all of the illegal immigrants who are currently in America. We should then bring in immigrants who are going to be productive members of our society and shift immigration away from the third world.

This is not to say that I oppose people from the third world coming in all together. I have the same attitude as Benjamin Franklin, who did not believe in “refusing entirely to admit [germans] into our Colonies: all that seems to be necessary is, to distribute them more equally, mix them with the English, establish English Schools where they are now too thick settled.” The third world immigrants would be analogous to the germans in this case. I think multiculturalism can only work if we bring people from different cultures into the country in small numbers and distribute them finely across the nation. We should also require them to assimilate to the American way of life. If we do that, the values that this nation was built upon will not change, and neither will the demographics.

How would any other ethnic group feel if they became a minority in their own country? Would the Japanese tolerate becoming a minority in Japan? How about hispanics in Mexico? What about the Indians in India? They would all feel that their way of life is being threatened by immigrants. Why is it only majority white nations that are asked to add more racial diversity to their population? We as Americans need to start showing the same survival instinct that other countries would show in the face of a demographic and cultural threat. It is not racist or xenophobic to want to preserve your country’s identity and culture. In fact, it is a responsible thing for us to do as it would minimize internal conflict and secure the blessings of liberty to our posterity.

In order for us to avoid tribal conflict in the future, we must do away with this notion of America being “a nation of immigrants.” History has shown that multiculturalism has not resulted in what its proponents have promised us. We need to get back in touch with our European roots and heritage if we are to “preserve those invaluable treasures,” as Franklin put it. Although I am not of European descent myself, I admire Western Civilization. It is the only true hope for mankind, which is why it must be protected.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *