"Border security is about more than just physical borders" -- that's a revealing quote from Rudy Giuliani's essay, "The Resilient Society: A Blueprint for Homeland Security," appearing in the Winter 2008 issue Manhattan Institute's City Journal. Why is it revealing? Because Giuliani proves, yet again, that he is not really serious about protecting American security and sovereignty. He might wish to combat terrorism, and that's much needed, but what's also needed is a plan for securing America. And in Giuliani's mind, that's NOT needed.
Surely, if the topic is homeland security, well, then, the idea of a wall or a fence along our border should figure prominently in Giuliani's article, right? WRONG! The word "wall" does not appear in the 3786-word article (except for references to bureaucratic walls), and the word "fence" appears just once, included in the same clause with the "virtual technological fence" idea that the open-borders crowd has always pushed as an alternative to a real fence. The open-borderers like "virtual" fences because a) they are glitchy and thus don't always work, and b) if they do work, they can always be switched off. Either way, the open-borderers will be happy. Now all that the global elites have to do is bamboozle the bubbas with Giuliani, their latest (although not their only) bait-and-switch candidate.
Of course, the idea of a "double fence"--you know, the kind of fence that really impedes unwanted border flow is not mentioned. And the magic words, "fence by date certain" are nowhere to be seen. With this article, Giuliani asks us to trust him. But as we shall see, Giuliani is operating from the wrong intellectual model of border security and national identity.
Giuliani and his intellectual and political mentors and allies have not earned our trust. They have earned our distrust.
With this article, Giuliani is signaling to the champions of the status quo--the Manhattan Institute, which published this article, is home to Tamar Jacoby, perhaps the single most tireless champion of open borders and unlimited immigration anyone on the conservative/neoconservative side of the spectrum--that he is still within the "enlightened" globalist consensus that prevails, still, in New York and Washington DC. What's needed is the tonic of Heartland common sense--It's the Fence, Stupid!
Giuliani was a great mayor of New York City, back in the 90s, but in addition to his personal problems, he seems unable to fully make the jump into the 00s. And that's ironic, because Giuliani was reborn after September 11, 2001.
As Rudy says with every breath he takes, that 9-11 changed just about everything. It certainly changed our view of the world, and the dangers lurking out there. The planet turned out to be a lot more complicated than just a bunch of countries waiting to get their first McDonald's franchise. Yes, of course, we must always interact with the world, but 9-11 sure reminded us that we needed to be safe and secure in our own country.
Doesn't it make sense to secure your little patch of earth first? Enjoy serenity and sovereignty in your own home? That way, you can tend to your garden, and then venture out, and invite others in, as you might wish? Isn't that the way most people think and operate in their personal lives? They go out into the environment to work and play and worship, but then they come home to their own little nest, or castle, or retreat. Home Sweet Home. I mean, when was the last time that Giuliani invited you to just drop by house any time, unannounced, and stay for awhile?
So why should countries be different? If walls are good for the Giuliani family--however defined--then they good for your family and my family, too. And by logical extension, walls are good, too, for the American Family.
Giuliani sees 9-11 as a profound terrorist act, and of course, it was. But it was more than just the herald of a long war against Al Qaeda. It was also a signal to us that it's not only a few rogue bands of terrorists who are hostile to us, but whole cultures, dedicated to jihadism, Salafism, Islamism, Castro-ism, Chavez-ism, Putinism, whatever. How to deal with such cultures? The first answer: keep a safe distance apart. On our own good time, without the sort of riots that have perplexed France in recent years, we should consider our best options for countering terror.
But in the meantime, let's double-down--and double-fence!--here at home. As the San Francisco Zoo now knows, if experts tell you that the wall around your tiger cage isn't high enough--build it higher. People will thank you for your foresight--or, in the case of the recent tragedy--curse you for your fecklessness.
Moreover, many cultures that aren't obviously hostile are, well, different. There's nothing wrong with foreign cultures, of course, but trying to meld different cultures is oftentimes troublesome, and best done in small doses, so that the host country can effectively and humanely assimilate newcomers. When in Rome, do as the Romans do--there's good practical political wisdom in those words of St. Jerome.
But Giuliani, as mayor and even now, seems blind to these larger cultural-historical concerns. In New York City, he was a champion of bilingual education, for example, in addition to supporting all manner of services for illegals. Has he really gotten the message that NYC is a special place in America, separate and distinct in many ways--central to our country, of course, but neverthess not the model that most Americans wish to emulate in their own communities? This piece in City Journal tells me that he is still looking at the world through Brooklyn eyes.
And so, for example, while bilingualism is still an article of faith to The New York Times and the Ford Foundation, most Americans recognize that it has been a disaster. Learning foreign languages is fine. But English is the language of America.
Furthermore, multiethnic societies are fine--Americans come in all colors--but multicultural societies are civil strife, even civil war, waiting to happen. As Giuliani himself said when he was running for mayor in 1993, there should be "one standard." He was talking mostly about criminal justice at the time, but the same principle applies to societies as a whole. Too bad he hasn't kept that "one standard" dictum in mind as he seeks to oversee America's overall destiny from the White House.
If Giuliani were still thinking about "one standard," he would see the value of one culture for a nation. The bitter lesson of the last 20 years: Multicultural societies flounder. Think the former USSR, think Yugoslavia, think Ethiopia, think Lebanon. Think Israel, if you include the Palestinians. And also a great many African countries, where the borders were carelessly drawn by divide-and-conquer colonialists; today, those same borders serve as cauldrons in which hostile ethnic rivals to duke it out in "elections." At last count, 124 people had died in the wake of Kenya's recent balloting. Tribal democracy is not democracy--it's just slowmotion war. So the answer is to replace tribes with nations. But that takes time and patience, and it can only take place if there's a "time out" on new fuel to the ethnic fire. And now, we might add to that list of ethnically riven countries, sadly, Iraq, Afghanistan, and oh yes, Pakistan.
All these sad countries deserve our compassion, and perhaps our aid. But what we should NOT do is import their ethno-religious rivalries here into the US.
And a big strong wall would symbolize our determination to preserve and protect the American way of life.
Even after months on the campaign trail, even after the failure of the Bush-Kennedy immigration "compromise" last spring, Rudy doesn't get it. It's obvious that he never will.
No comments:
Post a Comment