Late one evening, while driving through west Texas en route from California to New Jersey, I listened to a caller on talk radio defending the American educational system. The caller asked, "What could be wrong with education in the country that developed the first atomic bomb and put the first man on the moon?" Neither the host nor subsequent callers informed this caller that those great engineering efforts were largely driven by scientists and engineers who had fled Europe before, during, and immediately after World War II. The U.S. is a wonderful country and has given birth to many first rate scientists and engineers, but we have been able to overcome our lousy pre-University educational system, in part, because we are a great destination for immigrants. I have had the good fortune to work with wonderful scientists who moved to the U.S. from around the world, especially from India and China. Immigrants have made many great contributions to the U.S.
The failed, nativist congressional candidate for my district vows to run again in 2012. His 2010 platform included such bizarre planks as a complete 2 year halt in the granting of H1b visas, which would devastate our local tech based economy. His campaign rhetoric attributed anti-American thoughts and intent to the entire Hispanic immigrant community, including legal immigrants. He never explained how he gained access to their unspoken thoughts. The final nail in the coffin of my possible support for Mr. Nativist came when we exchanged emails about his desire to `rebalance' the ethnic origin of immigrants. I am supportive of ideas to give visa priority to those who through their education or business skills are most likely to make strong contributions to our economy. Using ethnicity as a determining criterion is a position strongly associated with the old Democratic party auxillary, the KKK, not with the Republicans. I pointed out this KKK association to Mr. Nativist, hoping he simply had not understood the implications of his word choice. He responded with a weird rant against Chinese immigrants. In our community, the Chinese immigrant community is dominated by scientists and engineers. Why this fellow would target them is beyond my ken. It certainly made it impossible for me to support him and prompted me to consider an opposing run. In addition to being inherently repugnant, a racist candidate would severely damage recruitment of new Republican voters. The declaration of the candidacy of the libertarian Republican freed me from running.
Current U.S. immigration policy is severely flawed in many ways, which I do not need to detail here, but consequent hostility to legal immigrants is misplaced. Legal immigration, especially if immigration policy is modified to be more economically rational, has the potential to continue to make great contributions to our (educationally challenged) society. Perhaps some people are so upset by illegal immigration that legal immigrants are simply tarred by association. On the other hand, maybe this is a non-issue. In my congressional district (which does not face significant illegal immigration issues like those facing Arizona), Republican voters rejected the candidacy of the anti-immigrant candidate. I'll work to ensure they reject him again in 2012.
Showing posts with label nativists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nativists. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Local Republican Politics
This summer as the healthcare battle heated up, I decided to explore the local Republican organization. I've voted Republican and contributed to Republican candidates my entire adult life but have never participated in the party itself. (I was also exploring a congressional run this summer and was trying to understand the landscape). So, I began regularly attending county party meetings and exploring local splinter groups too. The exposure has been educational and often amusing.
The county organization is split into two factions. These factions have no discernible ideological difference; they simply hate each other. I have not yet ascertained the origins of their animosity. I am frequently caught in the crossfire and have found myself shunned by one side if I spend too much time speaking to members of the opposing group. The main goal of each monthly meeting appears to be for one faction to gain dominance over the other. Little other business is accomplished.
The local Liberty Caucus is more energetic than the county party apparatus. Unfortunately, the only meeting I have attended thus far was dominated by conspiracy theorists (apparently the government is suppressing the information that our oil reserves are actually as large as Saudi Arabia's) and recommendations for stocking up canned goods for the impending disaster. I plan to return soon to see if this meeting was an aberration.
My county is dominated by University folk, and Democrats outnumber Republicans by about 4 to 1, but I am hoping that disgust over Obamacare will lead to one of those rare elections where Republicans can capture the local Congressional seat (if only for two years). I have been very attentive to the Republican Congressional primary, especially as I had considered entering the race myself. Our two leading candidates are a nativist/racist and a Libertarian. I find the nativist's views repugnant; moreover, he triggers a visceral negative response. I listen to my viscera. (Render unto Math those things that are mathematical and unto the viscera those things that are emotional.) The Libertarian is a pleasant man and is reasonably bright, but he has done a good job of ensuring that I describe myself as a Conservative instead of a Libertarian. While Libertarians share the Conservative desire for smaller, less intrusive government, they strike me on closer inspection as being as otherworldly as the Liberals. They also have a penchant for spherical horses when analyzing foreign policy issues. I find their notions on currencies bizarre. My local candidate advocates allowing the introduction of competing currencies in the U.S. He completely ignores the gross economic inefficiencies introduced when comparisons of relative costs and returns on capital are obscured by multiple units of currency. Who wants to hedge currencies when transporting Texas gas to New York? Our Libertarian candidate also obsesses over the Federal Reserve. While I understand his objections - excessive growth of the money supply - I reveal my conservative inclinations. Rather than throw out the Fed, which has been with us through nearly a century of amazing economic growth, I would first like to remove the mandate for full employment from the list of Fed duties and see what ensues. Placing the stability of our monetary system in the hands of Russian mining interests by returning to the gold standard holds no appeal for me. In response to the Libertarian's attack on Fed generated inflation, our nativist candidate now preaches the virtue of inflation.
Forced to choose between a nativist and a Libertarian, I'll probably support the latter. There is less scope and support for Libertarian mischief in Congress than for nativist mischief. Moreover, I feel a nativist candidate would stain the entire local Republican party and retard its growth in this potentially dramatic election year.
The county organization is split into two factions. These factions have no discernible ideological difference; they simply hate each other. I have not yet ascertained the origins of their animosity. I am frequently caught in the crossfire and have found myself shunned by one side if I spend too much time speaking to members of the opposing group. The main goal of each monthly meeting appears to be for one faction to gain dominance over the other. Little other business is accomplished.
The local Liberty Caucus is more energetic than the county party apparatus. Unfortunately, the only meeting I have attended thus far was dominated by conspiracy theorists (apparently the government is suppressing the information that our oil reserves are actually as large as Saudi Arabia's) and recommendations for stocking up canned goods for the impending disaster. I plan to return soon to see if this meeting was an aberration.
My county is dominated by University folk, and Democrats outnumber Republicans by about 4 to 1, but I am hoping that disgust over Obamacare will lead to one of those rare elections where Republicans can capture the local Congressional seat (if only for two years). I have been very attentive to the Republican Congressional primary, especially as I had considered entering the race myself. Our two leading candidates are a nativist/racist and a Libertarian. I find the nativist's views repugnant; moreover, he triggers a visceral negative response. I listen to my viscera. (Render unto Math those things that are mathematical and unto the viscera those things that are emotional.) The Libertarian is a pleasant man and is reasonably bright, but he has done a good job of ensuring that I describe myself as a Conservative instead of a Libertarian. While Libertarians share the Conservative desire for smaller, less intrusive government, they strike me on closer inspection as being as otherworldly as the Liberals. They also have a penchant for spherical horses when analyzing foreign policy issues. I find their notions on currencies bizarre. My local candidate advocates allowing the introduction of competing currencies in the U.S. He completely ignores the gross economic inefficiencies introduced when comparisons of relative costs and returns on capital are obscured by multiple units of currency. Who wants to hedge currencies when transporting Texas gas to New York? Our Libertarian candidate also obsesses over the Federal Reserve. While I understand his objections - excessive growth of the money supply - I reveal my conservative inclinations. Rather than throw out the Fed, which has been with us through nearly a century of amazing economic growth, I would first like to remove the mandate for full employment from the list of Fed duties and see what ensues. Placing the stability of our monetary system in the hands of Russian mining interests by returning to the gold standard holds no appeal for me. In response to the Libertarian's attack on Fed generated inflation, our nativist candidate now preaches the virtue of inflation.
Forced to choose between a nativist and a Libertarian, I'll probably support the latter. There is less scope and support for Libertarian mischief in Congress than for nativist mischief. Moreover, I feel a nativist candidate would stain the entire local Republican party and retard its growth in this potentially dramatic election year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)