The US Constitution is racist, and so was every Naturalization and immigration law passed before WW2

submitted by Fourth_stage from thuletide.wordpress.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Lugger 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

...and so was every Naturalization and immigration law passed before WW2

That's a common belief held by both the left and the right, but actually, it's far from the truth. The Americans started letting in nonwhite immigrants in pretty large numbers much earlier; I'd say that the end of the Civil War was the event that, for some reason, triggered lawmakers and especially judges to implement nonwhite-inclusive policies.

Go to Wikipedia and have a look at various late 19th century lawsuits where nonwhites, such as Arabs and Indians, argued that they fall under the definition of "white" and therefore should be allowed to naturalize.

And guess what? Cucked judges, instead of rightfully dismissing their obviously retarded claims, laughing them out of the courts and telling them to stick their stupid lawsuits up their asses, ruled in favor of these people and allowed them to become U.S. citizens, "confirming" that they indeed were white!

I once read a lawsuit filed by some Indian, and the brainlet judge not only allowed him to receive citizenship, but also commented that "[that Indian] was one of the purest white people" or other crap like this. facepalm

Another lawsuit I read was filed by a Syrian immigrant. This is one of my favourites!

The judge, as you may have guessed, ruled in favor of granting him citizenship, arguing that Syrians are white (lmao). Someone objected by citing the Founding Fathers' words where they made it clear that only Europeans are considered white and therefore eligible for citizenship...

The judge's response? He agreed that it was indeed what the Founding Fathers meant, but proceeded with his decision nonetheless!

Keep in mind that these court hearings — along with the countless others — occured in the 19th century when the U.S. was still considered to be "based".

And don't even get me started on East Asian immigrants who not only were allowed into the country to be used as cheap labor, but also the government took no measures to send back where they belong; needless to say, that retardation culminated in a lawsuit that enacted the birthright citizenship.

(yes, the U.S. gubmint took a few pathetic steps in the form of the Chinese exclusion act, but it wasn't enough and it didn't address the problem of the Asians who were already in the country)

So what were the people saying again? The Hart-Cellar act marked the beginning of the U.S. demographic decline?! Pffff, no. It was merely a final nail in the coffin; the decline began much earlier.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Go to Wikipedia and have a look at various late 19th century lawsuits where nonwhites, such as Arabs and Indians, argued that they fall under the definition of "white" and therefore should be allowed to naturalize. And guess what? Cucked judges, instead of rightfully dismissing their obviously retarded claims, laughing them out of the courts and telling them to stick their stupid lawsuits up their asses, ruled in favor of these people and allowed them to become U.S. citizens, "confirming" that they indeed were white!

The American definition of White was also used to discriminate against Italians and Greeks so the inconsistency was there from the beginning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924

Ideally, the U.S would have been better off if it only made immigration a privileged position like Japan did and just focus on bringing people when it was needed, making assimilation much much easier and having greater control of its borders.

The all or nothing "who is White?" purity was always bound for disaster, especially as this was the same country that already brought in hundreds of thousands of African slaves, was constantly absorbing Native Americans populations, and bringing over the remaining worldly ethnicities as cheap labor. Like, what were they expecting to happen over the next 300 years?

Edit: Speaking of Japan, the same 1924 immigration article says the Japanese were so pissed at the new restrictions, that it actually played a major role in going to war with the U.S. Oh wow. Major screw up of the century?

https://time.com/4659392/history-fallout-restricting-immigration/

[–]Nasser 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

"Edit: Speaking of Japan, the same 1924 immigration article says the Japanese were so pissed at the new restrictions, that it actually played a major role in going to war with the U.S. Oh wow. Major screw up of the century?"

How is that a screw up? Japan had zero chance of ever beating the US and in the end the US gained a 2 new vassal states and massive influence over the East Asian world.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Perhaps they could have avoided war or lessen the vicious impact that came with dealing their future enemy?

For example, the Japanese feeling insulted by the U.S immigration laws may have pushed them to treat U.S POW's as inferior and undeserving of humane treatment. This was definitely the case with war crimes like the Bataan Death March, where Americans where barely regarded as human.

Gaining a new vassal state still came at the tremendous loss of Allied lives. Many of whom never even got to see the results of this product.

[–]Nasser 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I guarantee Japan would have the done the exact shit immigration policy or not.