A: An argument that seems cogent on it's face but taken logically makes little sense.  It purports that since we benefited from immigration in the past, it must be an eternal good.  This is just not so. Every nation is a nation of immigrants, citizens did not spring from rocks but emigrated from other locales.  This does not mean that unrestricted immigration is good for everyone.  A nation should have guidelines to chose who emigrates.  Do we want individuals who share our culture and language?  Do we want individuals with high levels of education?  The fact is, with the astronomically high levels of legal and illegal immigration in this country, it's obvious that we have no concrete guidelines.  This means that it is the non-citizens of this nation who choose our immigration policy, i.e. who gets in, and not the citizens.  And with amnesties for illegal aliens constantly recurring, there seems to be little benefit in obeying the immigration laws at all.

Few racialists believe that there should be no immigration; what they object to are the undemocratic de facto immigration "policies" currently in play.

BACK