This is an interesting post. Let us hope the last paragraph becomes fruition - and soon!

 

Total national security shutdown: Immigration cessation has long-standing historical precedent

By Amanda Head justthenews.com 11-28-25

In the wake of Wednesday’s shooting of two National Guard members, Trump is pushing to tighten vetting and border controls as a direct countermeasure against possible national security threats posed by migrants inadequately screened under the Biden-era protocols.

President Donald Trump announced Thursday he intends to "permanently pause" immigration from all Third World countries and reexamine green-card holders who are not a "net asset" to the country. 

Trump posted on social media: "I will permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries to allow the U.S. system to fully recover, terminate all of the millions of Biden illegal admissions, including those signed by Sleepy Joe Biden’s Autopen, and remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States, or is incapable of loving our Country, end all Federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens of our Country, denaturalize migrants who undermine domestic tranquility, and deport any Foreign National who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western Civilization."

The term "Third World," in the modern sense, is a reference to poorer nations ("developing") with a Low Human Development Index (HDI). The term originated during the Cold War to describe nations not aligned with either the US (First World) or the Soviet Union (Second World). Today, it has evolved to refer to developing countries, often with economic instability, high poverty, and lower standards of living. Political correctness has guided many to prefer terms like "developing countries" or "low and lower-middle-income countries." 

Long history of immigration shutdowns

The total or near-total shutdown of immigration has been enforced many times throughout U.S. history during several crises, most recently in 2020 when Trump’s Proclamations 10014 and 10052, combined with a global shutdown of U.S. embassy visa services due to COVID-19, effectively stopped almost all immigrant and most temporary-worker visa entries for months. 

National security has been the basis of such shutdowns as long ago as in the early part of the last century. During the Great Depression and World War II, from roughly 1930 to 1945, strict application of the “likely to become a public charge” clause and wartime security rules drove legal immigration to near-zero levels without a single blanket ban. Similar de facto pauses occurred in 1918–1920 amid the Spanish flu and postwar chaos, and again in the months following the September 11, 2001, attacks when consular processing was largely suspended for security reviews. 

While landmark laws such as the 1921 Emergency Quota Act and the 1924 Immigration Act sharply curtailed inflows through numerical limits, the only modern instance of a formal, broad suspension explicitly pausing virtually all legal immigration channels remains the 2020 COVID-19 measures.

As early as 1919, the Department of Justice deported more than 500 people, including notable anarchist Emma Goldman. Nearly 10,000 people in 70 cities were arrested on the basis of the spread of radicalism and immigration from Europe in what is called by historians "The Palmer Raids," named after then-Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer.

Since the start of Trump's involvement in politics in 2015, he has made illegal immigration a hallmark issue of his campaign. During his second term, deportations have been a divisive issue, separating liberals who oppose the raids and deportations and those who support the moves to decrease the illegal immigrant population. 

Nobody is certain about the illegal immigrant population

In Charlotte and surrounding communities, ICE enforcement operations in recent weeks have left some day-labor pickup sites, apartment complex parking lots and certain shopping centers noticeably deserted during hours that were previously crowded with workers. Community members and business owners in similar affected cities, including Atlanta, Nashville and parts of suburban Chicago report the same pattern, leading many to question if the official estimates of the illegal immigrant population living in the U.S. are underestimated.  

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through its Office of Homeland Security Statistics, provides the most authoritative estimates of the illegal immigrant population. The figures are derived using the "residual method," which subtracts the estimated number of legal immigrants from the total foreign-born non-citizen population in Census Bureau surveys like the American Community Survey (ACS), while adjusting for undercounts, deaths and emigration.

Between 11 and 20 million

DHS's latest publicly available comprehensive estimate, released in April 2024, places the illegal immigrant population at 11 million as of January 1, 2022. Critics of the official estimates, including former Border Patrol chiefs, analysts at the Center for Immigration Studies and FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform), argue that the true unauthorized immigrant population is likely between 15 and 20 million or higher, contending that DHS and Pew figures substantially undercount recent border crossers, visa overstays, and those evading census surveys entirely.

Trump concluded his Thanksgiving night social media post with a warning that said, "HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL, except those that hate, steal, murder, and destroy everything that America stands for — You won’t be here for long!"

 

Another very important post to study - Our future depends on US to get educated, inspired, involved and participate to save our Republic!

 

Cultural Relativism Is Forcing The Collapse Of America’s Institutions

By Allan J. Feifer www.americanthinker.com

Alone, Donald Trump will not change our national mood. Tens of millions are permanently disenchanted. The America of today is light-years away from the America I grew up in. It’s not so much our demographics, or our failed education system, or our tilt towards socialism. It’s not that millions are confused as to their sexuality.

Of course, it’s all of this and more, but what allowed these fracture lines to develop and grow rapidly can likely be traced to the fact that all of the systems that once upheld America are collapsing—and that’s happening because cultural relativism forces us to pretend that they have no value.

 

Image created using AI.

Witness so many vital metrics in freefall, buttressing the belief that whatever we are doing isn’t working. Yet, institutional inertia keeps pushing us down the same dead-end paths leading to failure:

1.    Spending both personally and within our federal government beyond our means undermines our future, as interest on the debt has reached ridiculous levels, making us vulnerable to economic blackmail and economic slavery.

2.    After two generations of public education spiraling out of control, Johnny has been left with a substandard education, unpayable debt, and failing on a hyper-competitive world stage.

3.    America is no longer the competitive leader it once was. To the extent we compete at all, too many of our leaders are recent arrivals. Worse, we have virtually capitulated entire essential industries to dubious offshore locales, and management, under the flag of globalization.

4.    We Balkanized our country, with millions entering our country as economic migrants not intending to assimilate, harboring ill feelings towards our institutions, people, and American-style norms.

5.    Companies have a mission statement; why doesn’t America have one? How much longer can we remain Americans without shared values and goals?

Part of the problem is that moral relativism tells Americans that no one political system or set of values is better than another. Cultural relativism is not a sign of progress but rather a dismantling of our moral and cultural foundations. The erosion isn’t abstract—it’s visible, tangible, and operationally consequential. When we welcome in people from dysfunctional countries and insist that their ways are equal to our better than our highly successful ways, we’ve got a problem.

Or, as one friend said to me: “Millions of uneducated, and uneducable (low-IQ), invaders, propagating like rabbits, are rapidly eroding the pillars of our society.” Can anyone really make the case that it’s not so?

We can’t be the home of individualism and dependency at the same time. It’s inconsistent with our values, allowing millions of our citizens to live drugged lives as wards of the State. We won’t survive doing your own thing, featuring antisocial or destructive behavior undermining our core beliefs. Our government must end encouraging, allowing, funding, or tolerating anti-American activities. Doing so is cultural suicide, not freedom. Freedom must espouse life-affirming behavior, or it’s a dead end.

Our acceptance of cultural relativism reflects a foundational tension in moral philosophy and cultural governance. Our way, the old way, had virtues that, when erased, will destroy us. Moral truths are objective, not contingent on cultural trends. What was considered moral 50 years ago—fidelity, patriotism, traditional family structures—should still be upheld.

These values are aligned with tried and true, successful systems:

• Natural law theory (Aquinas, Locke): Morality is discoverable through reason and universal human nature.
• Deontological ethics (Kant): Moral duties are inarguable and not subject to fickle cultural reinterpretation.
• Traditional conservatism: Institutions and norms evolved for a purpose and exist for a reason.

Critics speciously argue that morality must respond to new understandings of harm, autonomy, and justice. That’s hogwash, and fundamental truths don’t change because some past moral precepts may have excluded or oppressed certain groups (e.g., racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, women). The principle that “all men [that is, all humans] are created equal,” is an exemplary one, untainted by early American failings to abide by it.

Cultural Relativists believe feelings or shifting norms override reasoned moral foundations. Traditional views are reframed as outdated or harmful, even when they’re logically coherent. Conservatives are attacked and labeled as “bitter clingers” or “deplorables”, “science deniers”, and “white supremacists.” When was the last time you heard of anyone accused of a hate crime for uttering any of these derogatory and hateful phrases, thrown like so much confetti by the left?

Conservatives are not just defending tradition—we’re defending moral epistemology grounded in reason and permanence. I see cultural relativism as the opposite of progress, as it dismantles our shared moral foundations. That erosion isn’t abstract—it’s visible, tangible, and consequential.

Since America has embraced the left’s cultural relativism, we’ve seen the decline in American institutions as described above. These, in turn, reflect more fundamental societal failures:

• Breakdown of family structures: Declining marriage rates, rising single-parent households, and the redefinition of family norms.
• Erosion of civic trust: Institutions once seen as neutral arbiters—like the courts, universities, or the press—are now viewed as ideological enemies.
• Moral incoherence: Public standards that shift rapidly, where yesterday’s consensus becomes today’s heresy.
• Normalization of disorder: From urban crime and drug use to public vulgarity and the collapse of decorum in politics and media.

These aren’t just aesthetic concerns—they’re operational markers of social cohesion, institutional legitimacy, and intergenerational continuity. Thinkers from Roger Scruton to Thomas Sowell have warned that when societies abandon objective moral anchors, they don’t become freer—they become more chaotic, more tribal, and more vulnerable to authoritarianism masquerading as liberation; sound familiar?

We can observe the inevitable moral paralysis, institutional fragility, and massive civic fragmentation that always follow in the wake of cultural relativism. If all values are equal, then none are defensible. Without shared norms, law and policy become tools of factional power. A society without moral consensus becomes a battleground of identities and grievances.

Can a society survive without shared moral absolutes?

None that I know of. We are well along the way to becoming the next failed society.

God Bless America!

 

Please study this post, our future is in jeopardy.

 

Earned Entitlements And Mass Immigration

By Christian Vezilj www.americanthinker.com

In the shadow of well-meaning slogans and impassioned rallies, a quiet crisis is brewing—one that threatens the very systems built by generations of American workers. Social Security and Medicaid, two pillars of our social contract, are facing demographic and fiscal strain.

At the same time, a growing political movement seeks to legalize millions of illegal aliens, offering them a pathway to citizenship and, eventually, access to these entitlement programs—programs to which they haven’t, or have barely, contributed. The moral impulse behind this push is understandable. But the economic consequences, especially for older Americans and the rising generation, are rarely discussed with honesty.

 

Image created using AI.

We can explore the question of naturalizing those who entered the country illegally through the lens of simplicity and critical thought. I have witnessed rallies across the nation, crowds of retirees and working-class citizens standing shoulder to shoulder, passionately endorsing illegal immigration and denouncing ICE as if it were an occupying force.

Many of these same citizens, I suspect, have spent three, four, even five decades faithfully contributing to Social Security. Their payroll taxes were mandatory. Their sacrifices were tangible. Their commitment was unquestionable. Yet few seemed to recognize that the very system they labored to sustain now stands at risk of destabilization by the very policies they so fervently champion.

Let’s be clear: illegal aliens are not currently eligible for Social Security or Medicaid. But if legalized and eventually naturalized, they would become eligible, and that’s where the tension begins.

The Contribution Gap

It is undeniable that many individuals residing in the country illegally do, in fact, pay taxes. Some file returns using Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs), while others are employed under borrowed or fraudulent Social Security numbers. According to estimates from the Social Security Administration, illegal alien workers contributed more than $26 billion to the trust fund in 2023 alone.

Yet this headline figure conceals a deeper reality. Millions of others remain outside the system entirely, working off the books, paid in cash, and contributing nothing to the tax base or social safety net. This shadow economy not only undermines fairness but also erodes the integrity of the system itself.

Moreover, every position filled by someone who is in the country unlawfully represents an opportunity denied to an American citizen. Jobs that could provide stability, dignity, and upward mobility for legal residents are instead diverted, creating a silent but significant displacement in the labor market.

Even among those who do pay, the duration and amount of their contributions often fall short of what’s required to sustain long-term benefits. Social Security is not a welfare program; it’s an earned benefit. The average American worker contributes for decades before drawing retirement income. Legalizing millions of illegal aliens who have only recently begun contributing, or who may never meet the full eligibility criteria, creates a fiscal imbalance. They will receive more than they paid in, and someone else will have to make up the difference.

That someone is the American citizen.

The Hidden Costs of Compassion

Supporters of mass legalization often argue that immigrants will bolster the workforce and stabilize entitlement programs. After all, most illegal aliens are of working age. But this argument ignores the wage suppression and job displacement that often accompany large-scale immigration.

Harvard economist George Borjas found that illegal immigration reduces wages for low-skilled native workers, particularly those without high school diplomas. In sectors like construction, agriculture, and hospitality, American citizens are increasingly displaced by cheaper, illegal labor. This not only erodes wages but also undermines the tax base needed to fund Social Security and Medicaid.

Moreover, the fiscal drain extends beyond payroll taxes. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates a lifetime net cost of $68,000 per illegal alien, largely due to low education levels and higher use of means-tested programs. Medicare, in particular, faces pressure from emergency care provisions and long-term eligibility expansions. Legalization would only accelerate this trend.

Intergenerational Consequences

The most troubling aspect of this debate is its impact on generational equity. Older Americans, many of whom support illegal migration policies out of compassion or nostalgia, may not realize that their benefits are at risk. Social Security is already projected to run short by 2033, triggering a 23% cut in benefits unless reforms are enacted. Adding millions of new claimants, many of whom contributed far less, will force painful choices:

• Raise the retirement age to 68 or beyond.
• Increase payroll taxes on younger workers.
• Reduce benefit formulas for future retirees.
• Means-test benefits, undermining the universality of the program.

These changes won’t affect the wealthy. They’ll hit the middle class, the very people who built the system and now rely on it. And they’ll hit the rising generation hardest, forcing them to pay more for benefits they may never receive.

Why the Silence?

Why don’t we talk about this? Why do older Americans, who have the most to lose, support policies that could erode their own retirement security?

Many see immigration through the lens of their own family histories—grandparents who came through Ellis Island, parents who worked hard to build a better life. They forget that those immigrants came legally, often with sponsors, and without access to entitlements. Today’s immigration landscape is fundamentally different.

Another reason is media and political messaging. The debate is framed as compassion versus cruelty, not sustainability versus collapse. Few politicians dare to speak the truth: that compassion without contribution is a recipe for fiscal ruin.

Finally, there’s a disconnect between policy and personal impact. Retirees may assume their benefits are locked in, unaware that future COLA adjustments, spousal benefits, and lifetime caps could be trimmed to accommodate new claimants. They may not connect their decades of contributions to the redistribution effects that legalization could trigger.

A Call for Critical Thinking

The older generation and the younger generation alike are, perhaps unknowingly, supporting their own financial demise at the expense of illegal aliens who should not be in the country to begin with. The question must be asked: why can’t they see beyond the talking points? Why do so many blindly support policies that will affect them deeply later—policies that will erode their retirement, suppress their wages, and burden their children?

America is a nation of immigrants, but also a nation of laws, systems, and promises. Social Security and Medicaid are not infinite wells. They are fragile compacts between generations. To preserve them, we must confront hard truths, not just comforting narratives.

Americans need to think with clear heads, not heated emotions. If millions of people who entered the country illegally are naturalized, workers nearing retirement will see their benefits erode, while younger workers will face higher taxes to sustain the system. The younger will pay, the older will sacrifice, and everyone in between will bear the burden—without having truly consented to these outcomes. What was once designed as a safeguard for those who worked and sacrificed may instead become a mechanism of redistribution, eroding the very promise of security it was meant to uphold.