1
   

How to destroy America

 
 
rayban1
 
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 12:52 pm
How to destroy America

We all know Dick Lamm as the former Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Last week there was an immigration-overpopulation conference in Washington, DC, filled to capacity by many of American's finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor named Victor Hansen Davis talked about his latest book, "Mexifornia," explaining how immigration - both legal and illegal was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.

Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, "If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time.
Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.'"

1. "Here is how they do it," Lamm said: "Turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual.

"The historical scholar Seymour Lipset put it this way: 'The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy.' Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans."

2. Lamm went on: "Invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.

3. "We could make the United States an 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: 'The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.'"

4. Lamm said, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America reinforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."

5. "Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school."

6. "My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology.' I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population."

7. "My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other."

"A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy Persia threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to over come two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. "E. Pluribus Unum" -- >From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus' instead of the 'unum,' we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo."

8. "Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits ~ make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity.' I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate."

"Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturist, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."

9. In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow.
Profound silence followed. Finally he said, "Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book Mexifornia. His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book."

There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today. Every discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity.'

American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in America - take note of California and other states - to date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984." In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building: "War is peace," "Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength."

Governor Lamm, walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy is deeply in trouble and worsening fast. If we don't get this immigration monster stopped within three years, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream.


­
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 6,349 • Replies: 148
No top replies

 
Discreet
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 01:32 pm
Or you could just go around throwing chains on all the major electric power plants knocking out electricity to a large part of the US. Do it to enough places and our economic situation will be left in ruins. Imagine if the entire US didn;t have power for a week.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 02:24 pm
I assume that Lamm was speaking tongue-in-cheek to shame the xenophobic, jingoistic audience he was addressing. Which would explain the last paragraph, i.e. why nobody applauded. They knew they'd been had.
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 02:46 pm
No, Merry, Lamm was serious. That speech encapsulates his political philosophy.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 02:48 pm
Who wrote this heavy-breathing summary of the speech, I wonder. Reads like second-rate Sci Fi.

Be afraid -- be very afraid!!
0 Replies
 
CodeBorg
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 02:51 pm
Nice speech, very gripping. Let's see . . .

poignant
finest
brilliant
destroyed all vestiges
stunning
ravages
tension, conflict, and antagonism
blessing ... curse
turmoil, tension, and tragedy
face crises
dominance
unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic
cult of 'Victimology'
grievance industry
divided loyalties
downfall
taboo
paralyzed
wiped his brow
deeply in trouble
monster


You don't have to read too many of the nouns to understand how sensationalism works.

The emotionally loaded phrases and hooks are enough to see that the article is dramatically pulling our chain. Pushing and manipulating others primarily with FEAR - creating turmoil and antagonism when people could actually be working together from a larger-minded point of view.

Should the entire world live together ... or not?

Cultural genocide anyone?
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 03:02 pm
If, indeed, this speech was given in all seriousness, I think it is some of the most chauvinistic, jingoistic, xenophobic. abysmally narrow-minded horseshite I have ever read.

1) There is absolutely no basis for Lamm saying that a bilingual country is historically doomed. Is Canada in bad trouble? Is Switzerland? The Roman Empire at its ass-kicking high point was largely bilingual. Latin was the language of the Forum. Most people in the street spoke Greek. When the Empire did, finally, collapse, it had nothing to do with language. I would go even further to suggest that a bilingual culture is possibly stronger than a monolingual one.

2) Nobody "invented" multiculturalism, as Lamm asserts. Multiculturalism has been a fact of life in America since the earliest days of the country's inception. At the time of the American Revolution there were more Dutch than English living in New York, more Germans than English in Pennsylvania, a huge French minority in northern Maine (then a part of Massachusetts). Multiculturalism is what keeps this country vibrant and ever-changing. Any entity which doesn't change with the times, stagnates. In the end, which comes quite soon, it dies. Multiculturalism may well be America's only hope. In the 1840s it was the Irish that gave this country an influx of new blood. In the early days of the 20th century it was the Italians and Eastern Europeans, including a huge influx of Eastern European Jews. Today it is Spanish-speakers and Southeast Asians. A beautiful kalleidoscope of intertwining cultures.

3) The suggestion of making the country a "Hispanic Quebec" is insulting both to Quebec and to the USA. It implies, on the one hand, the desirability of establishing a kind of Spanish-speaking province (perhaps incorporating several states in the Southwest) a la the French-speaking Quebec. This would be a totally arbitrary and historically unprecdented (except in the now-defunct USSR) move. On the other hand, it implies that there is something "bad" about the Francophone situation in La Belle Province. Lamm totally ignores history. Quebec is largely French-speaking because, at its inception, it was a French colony. The British, to their credit, gave the local residents very favorable terms when they acquired the colony following what was called Queen Anne's War in Europe. The French language was to be allowed. Good job, Brits. We should have been so kind to the Mexicans in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Colorado and Utah when we acquired that parcel of real estate in 1848, following one of the most unjust wars this country has ever engaged in. It turns my stomach to read this tripe. If you hear more Spanish than English being spoken in certain towns in the Southwest, that is only right and as it should be.

If any of this was said with any degree of seriousness, rather than as dark satire playing on the paranoia of the jingoists assembled, I truly do fear for the future of this country.

[btw, I had seen this nonsense before. A friend sent it to me as an e-mail and we both assumed that Dick Lamm was guilty of a major 'put on.' If he's serious, it really turns my stomach.]
0 Replies
 
CodeBorg
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 03:03 pm
Quote:
People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together.

An appeal to Nationalism. Let's save our country, separate ourselves from and dominate the "others".

But nations are obsolete! So get over it. Multinational organizations are running the show far more powerfully and effectively than any "government" - which are now simply tools.

Nationalism is an effective tactic only with people whose minds are molded in 19th century perspectives. I bet the audience was primarily over 80. Everybody else has moved on to other social machines, far more rooted and controlling than Nationalism.

We live in the World, not America. There are much larger economies, cultures and games being played than just red, white and blue Freedomology.



. . . I like the hellfire and brimstone part though.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 04:24 pm
I read the post and happen to agree with it to a certain extent. The US used to be known as the melting pot because of the ability of many different cultures to move here and then adapt to the American way of life. That isn't encouraged any longer and we are told that people should have to give up their old culture when moving here, whether it is legal or illegal immigration.

The US is losing its culture and multiculturalism is taking over. Out govt wastes money printing documents in foreign languages and our schools are forced to have classes in 2 or 3 languages. People are allowed to get off of murder charges because it was ok to kill their wives in their old country and that is accepted even though the US is not their old country.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 04:40 pm
Baldimo wrote:
People are allowed to get off of murder charges because it was ok to kill their wives in their old country and that is accepted even though the US is not their old country.


Huh? You have any links or references to back that up, Baldy? Anyone resident (or even just visiting) this country is subject to the same laws as are the citizens here. And it doesn't matter whether they entered legally or illegally; the law is the same for everybody, viz. the 14th Amendment.
0 Replies
 
fredjones
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 04:41 pm
I would really like to see the video that showed him making this speech. Rayban1 has given us some context, but it is impossible to determine whether his description is accurate. I am therefore disregarding anything that is not in quotes. Now, onto the show...

1) Bilingualism necessarily divides people. Although the government might speak using two languages, it only encourages people of the one language to refuse to learn the other. Read: Spanish speaking immigrants would have no reason to learn to communicate with english speaking people and VICE VERSA. In a democracy, this can not be a good thing.

2) Multiculturalism CAN be a good thing, but when it is taken to the extreme, it cannot. Why is diversity good? We bring people together so that they understand each other and homogenize. Keeping people APART is bad. Funny thing that the best cure for racism is exposing racists to the people they hate. Reaching common ground is good; promoting cultural separation is never good. It is possible to keep your culture and accept the culture of others. Right now there is too much emphasis on defining people based on their ancestral origins. Just because you are black or white does not mean that you have to play these games.

Immigration, however is good. It brings new ideas and ways of thinking. Immigrants who do not wish to be assimilated are not doing us a service. Fortunately the children of immigrants are being assimilated.

3) Like it or not, the author does make an excellent point. We are not able to discuss the politics of immigration or diversity because anytime we try, it results in name calling. IT HAPPENED RIGHT HERE.

Debate the issues. This guy did not invent these ideas, and just because you (collective, not anyone here) look at the world through race-colored glasses doesn't mean that he does. Emotionally charged words do not add to the discussion.

4) The future is globalism. But the world does not believe in democracy yet. Therefore if we want to respect the sovereignty of others we must insure that our nation stands strong. That means that if we were governed by an international body, it could not be democratic the same way that we are. Six billion people cannot agree on the same things yet. We are too different. Globalism will take time. After all, there are parts of the world that are hundreds of years behind us in technology and education. An international body cannot serve them as well as local politics can. Nations still have a purpose, just like states and districts and cities still do. Nations will be slowly merged into the idea of an international body. I doubt, however, that such an international entity will exist in our lifetime.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 04:47 pm
Quote:
1. "Here is how they do it," Lamm said: "Turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual.

India seems to be doing OK with 16 official languages. In fact, hi tech firms regularly lobby to maintain or increase immigration from India, and i doubt highly that all the Indian immigrants speak English as their primary language, let alone English only. Are they the exception that proves Mr. Lamm's assertion?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 04:47 pm
Much of California does look like a third world country these days.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 04:56 pm
yitwail wrote:
India seems to be doing OK with 16 official languages. In fact, hi tech firms regularly lobby to maintain or increase immigration from India, and i doubt highly that all the Indian immigrants speak English as their primary language, let alone English only. Are they the exception that proves Mr. Lamm's assertion?


Yes, they do appear to be doing "OK".

http://www.rickstones.essex.sch.uk/Hum/indian%20train.jpg
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 04:56 pm
Merry Andrew wrote:
Baldimo wrote:
People are allowed to get off of murder charges because it was ok to kill their wives in their old country and that is accepted even though the US is not their old country.


Huh? You have any links or references to back that up, Baldy? Anyone resident (or even just visiting) this country is subject to the same laws as are the citizens here. And it doesn't matter whether they entered legally or illegally; the law is the same for everybody, viz. the 14th Amendment.


WRONG!!!
Any person in this country on a diplomatic passport is EXEMPT from our laws.They cannot even be given a traffic ticket.
There have been many examples of diplomats committing serious crimes in this country and not being charged with a crime,because of their passport.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 05:01 pm
Very thoughtful post, fredjones, and I do agree with some of what you say. (I disgaree with your point #1, that bilingualism necessarily divides people. In Switzerland, for example, virtually everybody speaks both German and French and can do so interchangeably. They have to if they wish to graduate high school.) I agree that globalism is inevitable and I also agree that it will be slow in coming. But eventual globalism does not necessarily equal homoginzation, a loss of a given group's language and cultural values. English may well become the universal language of the future (it's on its way there now), but that doesn't mean it will be spoken in every home. It is the diversity of humanity, our individual and group differences, which make human beings such interesting creatures. I would hate to see a world (or even a country) where evryone dressed the same, spoke the same language, thought the same and cooked and ate the same food. That is mind-deadening and stultifying. The McDonaldization of the planet is a frightening image.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 05:05 pm
as i said, it's doing OK:

http://www.powershares.com/images/world_gdp.jpg
0 Replies
 
Adrian
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 05:12 pm
For anyone who's interested, the article in the first post was written by Frosty Wooldridge back in October 2003. Frosty has a very clear anti immigration bias.
0 Replies
 
fredjones
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 05:27 pm
Thank you for your kind words Merry.

Merry Andrew wrote:
It is the diversity of humanity, our individual and group differences, which make human beings such interesting creatures. I would hate to see a world (or even a country) where evryone dressed the same, spoke the same language, thought the same and cooked and ate the same food. That is mind-deadening and stultifying. The McDonaldization of the planet is a frightening image.


We could not agree more on this point. However, if we spoke different languages we could not be having this discussion. Unless we are prepared to learn all languages, it becomes necessary to establish a standard. The distinction that I'm trying to make is that people can be bilingual, but nations should not be. Unless, as you point out, the whole country is bilingual, it does not make sense.

As far as the McDonaldization of the world goes, it is a shame. However, it seems inevitable at this point.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 05:52 pm
First, I would like to salute Merry Andrew for his reasoned response to an intentionally overwrought initial post. Well done.

Then:
there is this:
Quote:
The US is losing its culture and multiculturalism is taking over.


Hey.


Our ((the USA USA! USA USA !!) culture is, and always has been, multiculturalism. Different cultural groups have floated past each other, merged with each other, bounced off each other like the globs of stuff in a lava lamp throughout the history of this nation. We are a nation of nations. We always have been. We always shall be.

The idea that the United States of America was, at any point in it's history, a unified, monolithic culture is a fiction foisted about by the odd oddfellows group (no connection to the real Oddfellows) and occasionally lifted up by some, usually rock-ribbed, conservative politician on the Fourth of July or Labor Day to illustrate to his dim-witted listeners that was a Camelot of a different sort. The sort where everyone was white and spoke good English and behaved like they never heard of rock and roll.

Joe(god, what is that smell?)Nation
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » How to destroy America
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 09:45:50