Comment on an Immigration Book Review

| Thanks to the Occidentalist blog for the link |

Martin Witkerk has posted a book review of Debating the Ethics of Immigration: Is There a Right to Exclude? on the race-realist VDARE website.

His analysis contains the following:

Professor Cole offers a brief history of what he considers to have been “exclusions based on racism,” including the Chinese Exclusion Act, the White Australia Policy, the United Kingdom’s Aliens Act (1905), as well as restrictive legislation in the history of Canada, New Zealand and Natal (South Africa).

If by “racism” Professor Cole means attention to ancestry, I am happy to concur with him: a great deal of immigration policy has been, and still is, motivated by such concerns. Are you thinking of applying for citizenship in India? It helps to be Indian. If you have China or Taiwan in your sights, best to be Chinese. South Korea gives preference to Koreans. Liberia and Haiti have both imposed constitutional requirements that citizens be of African ancestry.

What exactly is attention to ancestry? If Europeans were ‘attentive to ancestry’ would they have become the majority population in the following non-European countries?

  • Argentina
  • Australia
  • Brazil
  • Canada
  • Chile
  • Costa Rica
  • Cuba
  • New Zealand
  • Puerto Rico
  • Uruguay
  • USA

That’s the size of three continents or half the number of habitable continents. Would they have created three large ethnic groups because they liked sexing ‘swarthy’ people?

  • Afropeans (mulattos)
  • Eurasians inclusive of Anglo-Indians
  • Mestizos

Not to mention that they imperialized most non-European countries. Thus from the list of non-European acts, the only one that can be justified is the UK Aliens Act (1905) which seemed non-ethnic in intent. From Wikipedia, it was

designed to prevent paupers or criminals from entering the country and set up a mechanism to deport those who slipped through. It provided asylum for people fleeing religious or political persecution.

The problem as always, is that immigration is not really the issue. The issue is that there should be mass scaled repatriation of European ethnics to their sacred European continent paid for by the governments of their respective ancestral lands. Reparations must follow for stolen lands with official apologies. Legislation must be introduced into every colonialist European nation stating that they will pursue policies of non-aggression and that their military will only be used for domestic affairs (à la post-war Japan). Then and only then will they have any moral authority to close THEIR borders. It is not that closing borders in any country is wrong, just that the people who want to clamour for it to be closed should never be European ethnics who reside in non-European countries.


Witkerk, Martin. 2012. The Philosophy Department Looks at Immigration. [accessed: 2012-06-26].


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.