Latest / Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News / The assimilation threshold and why immigration has limits

Transcript

The assimilation threshold and why immigration has limits · Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News

• 0:00
  In a world full of lies and deception, it takes courage to speak the truth.
• 0:05
  In a nation hell bent on its own destruction, it takes honor to seek a return to glory.
• 0:12
  Join us in cutting through the lies.
• 0:14
  Join us in cutting through the propaganda.
• 0:18
  Join us as we seek the truth on cutting through the fog from the America Out Loud Network.
• 0:24
  And here's your host, Wallace Garno.
• 0:27
  Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Cutting Through the Chaos on the America Out Loud Network, where we cut through the lies in the propaganda to bring you the out loud truth.
• 0:38
  I'm your host Wallace Garno, and as we narrow into what will be our 100th episode.
• 0:44
  We're not there yet, I believe this is number 92, but as we get closer to our nine, our 100th episode, we're also getting closer to the country's 250th birthday.
• 0:54
  My wife and I will be at the Nashville get together over July 2nd to uh July 4th.
• 1:00
  The whole we're gonna have a bunch of people from America Outloud out there.
• 1:02
  Malcolm, the editor-in-chief will be out there.
• 1:05
  I'll be there.
• 1:06
  I know Paul Angle is going to be there, and uh a bunch of other hosts, writers and uh and and personalities from America Out Loud will be in Nashville July 2nd to the 4th.
• 1:16
  If you don't have tickets, uh I invite you to get them.
• 1:19
  You can meet me personally, you can meet other personalities from America out loud, and uh, I think we're gonna have a great time celebrating the 250th birthday of our nation.
• 1:29
  By then we'll be past a hundred episodes on uh on on cutting through the chaos, and uh, we're just gonna have a great time.
• 1:36
  So hope to see you there, be a celebration, the birthday of our nation, and uh let's do it.
• 1:42
  Got a great show for you today.
• 1:44
  I want to talk about what I call the assimilation threshold.
• 1:48
  And being from Michigan, I kind of understand the assimilation threshold perhaps better than most.
• 1:54
  Uh because there's an old saying in Michigan that everyone on the on the west side of the state thinks that everything east of Lansing is Detroit, and that everyone in Detroit thinks that everything west of Lansing is Indiana.
• 2:07
  Uh the upper peninsula wants to be its own state, and the thumb wants to be its own country.
• 2:12
  Now I grew up on the west side of the state, and I can affirm to that when I was a kid, uh, as soon as we got west of Lansing, I was looking for Detroit.
• 2:20
  My dad used to take me to University of Michigan football games several times a year.
• 2:24
  My uncle played for the University of Michigan and had season tickets.
• 2:28
  So my dad would buy two of the season tickets.
• 2:30
  He'd sell one to his buddy Ollie Jochums.
• 2:32
  He had another friend that had uh was his name, Lauren Teal, that had his own season ticket way out in the end zone, and then my aunt and uncle had season tickets right next to my dad and Mr.
• 2:43
  Jokums.
• 2:44
  Well, my aunt and uncle only went to the big games.
• 2:46
  Any game that Michigan was going to win by 30 points, they were going to go to.
• 2:49
  So I'd go to the game.
• 2:50
  We would sell Mr.
• 2:51
  Teal's ticket on the way into the stadium for face value.
• 2:54
  We weren't scalping.
• 2:56
  And uh then Mr.
• 2:57
  Teal, my dad, Mr.
• 2:58
  Jochum and I would all sit together and watch the game, and uh, and and I remember as we got close to Ann Arbor, I always thought we were on the, you know, we're practically in Detroit.
• 3:07
  Well, turns out there's a fair difference distance between Ann Arbor and Detroit.
• 3:12
  But that was that west side of the state thinking that everything east of Lansing is Detroit.
• 3:18
  And then, of course, if you're in the city of Detroit, if you're from that area, then when you think of West Side, you're thinking of of the cities on the west side of Detroit suburbs.
• 3:26
  So like Wixham and Walt Lake.
• 3:28
  I lived in that area for a while, and people used to make fun of me because they'd say West Side, and I'm like thinking Muskegon or Kalamazoo or Grand Rapids, something on the west side of the state, and they're like, no, that's not the West Side.
• 3:38
  The West Side of Detroit, you idiot.
• 3:40
  We mean here in Wixa.
• 3:42
  And uh I got teased a bit for that.
• 3:45
  Also, those of us in the Lower Peninsula, we uh like to call the people the upper peninsula youpers.
• 3:52
  And of course, the people in the upper peninsula like to call those of us who live in the lower peninsula trolls after the troll who lived under the bridge in the children's story, uh the Billy Goats Gruff.
• 4:04
  Now, outside of tourism, there are not many jobs in the Upper Peninsula.
• 4:07
  It's absolutely God's country.
• 4:08
  It is absolutely gorgeous up there.
• 4:10
  Not the winter's cold, the summer's absolutely gorgeous in Michigan's Upper Peninsula.
• 4:15
  And the Mackinac Bridge, which is five miles long, is one of the most underappreciated bridges in the world.
• 4:23
  My wife and I last year uh spent a few weeks in Japan.
• 4:27
  And in Japan, going from one of the islands to the other, we went over the second longest suspension bridge in the world.
• 4:34
  Having grown up in Michigan with the Mackinac Bridge, I was kind of looking forward to going over the second longest suspension bridge in the world, because the Mackinac Bridge isn't even in the top ten, but it's still a very, very impressive bridge.
• 4:46
  So I'm thinking to myself, this is gonna be bigger than the Mackinac Bridge.
• 4:50
  Well, lo and behold, compared to the Mackinac Bridge, it did not look very impressive.
• 4:54
  The I don't remember how long the span of this bridge was, but the entire distance compared to the Mackinac Bridge, it was it was the most anticlimatic moment of the trip.
• 5:04
  It's a tiny little bridge compared to the Mackinac.
• 5:07
  But the thing about the Mackinac Bridge is that while the span of the suspension portion of the bridge is not that big compared to other large suspension bridges, it's still one of the biggest in the world, but not in the top ten anymore.
• 5:21
  Uh the bridge as a whole is five miles long.
• 5:26
  And when you see the whole thing, it's not only gorgeous, but it's very, very impressive.
• 5:30
  The size of this thing is very, very impressive.
• 5:33
  So if you go to Michigan, make sure you see the Mackinac Bridge, it'll absolutely be worth it.
• 5:38
  Uh but anyway, that's kind of what separates the whole thing.
• 5:41
  They call us the Billy Goats Gruff because we live under the Mackinac Bridge, not under it in the water, of course, but in terms of on a map, the upper peninsula of the Lower Peninsula.
• 5:50
  Uh, if you live in the Lower Peninsula, you live under the bridge, therefore you are a troll.
• 5:56
  The last time I was in the Upper Peninsula, a youpa reminded me that they like to call those who live under the bridge trolls.
• 6:02
  And I said, Yeah, well, you youpers have another nickname for those of us for the Lower Peninsula.
• 6:08
  Well, he didn't know what it was, so we asked, and I said, Well, sometimes you call us employed.
• 6:12
  Well, he didn't think it was funny, but I did, because there, as I said, not a lot of jobs up there outside of the tour season.
• 6:17
  There's uh a lot of poor people up there, a lot of people in the northern part of Michigan are on welfare.
• 6:22
  It's it's it's not a very most of the people that have jobs in Michigan are in the south, and uh that's just a fact of the state.
• 6:31
  Well, having been born and raised in Kalamazoo, uh, on the west side of this of Michigan, uh, though I've lived in Detroit now for about 20 years, I think I'm always probably gonna be a little bit of a transplant.
• 6:45
  My wife was born and raised in Communist Poland.
• 6:47
  She too is going to go to Nashville, so if you go to Nashville, you can meet her.
• 6:51
  Uh, but she's lived in the Detroit area for more than 30 years now, and she knows Detroit better than I do.
• 6:58
  She knows the restaurants downtown.
• 7:00
  She just knows the area better than I do.
• 7:02
  I've always lived in the in the in the outer suburbs, uh, the 20 years I've been in the Detroit area.
• 7:07
  She originally immigrated to Ham Tramic, which is right next to Detroit proper.
• 7:11
  It's actually surrounded by Detroit proper.
• 7:13
  There are two, quote, suburbs in Detroit, one of which is Hamptramic, that are completely surrounded by the city of Detroit.
• 7:20
  So she didn't live in Detroit in terms of the city limits, but she lived inside the city limits, just in another city that, believe it or not, is completely surrounded by Detroit.
• 7:31
  And she lived there for a number of years before she eventually moved to one of the nicer suburbs.
• 7:37
  My wife spent a lot of money, incidentally, in immigrating to the United States.
• 7:41
  She came over on a student visa, and there's a story there.
• 7:44
  She actually wanted to be a psychologist and wanted to go to the University of Warsaw.
• 7:48
  Well, this was under communism, so when it was time for her to, she took her test and everything.
• 7:54
  It was time to talk to the guy who was in charge of who gets admitted and who doesn't.
• 7:58
  He said, you know, you did very well on your entrance exam, and and you did so well that there are some years that you might be able to get in for the psychology program just on your test scores and and what you've done in school and everything else that goes into this just on that.
• 8:14
  But this particular year, we have more people that did well on the tests and that have a good background and everything else, and then we have slots available.
• 8:21
  So if you would like to go to the University of Warsaw to study psychology, what you can do is your father can buy my son a new car.
• 8:29
  And for the new car, I will let you go to college.
• 8:34
  That's how it worked.
• 8:35
  They don't get a lot of money being the person who decides who gets to go to college and who doesn't.
• 8:39
  But it was a communist country, and power has you can sell power.
• 8:45
  Power is a commodity that can be bought and sold in the market.
• 8:48
  So in a communist country like Poland at that time, it was bought and sold.
• 8:52
  He had the power to decide who gets to go to college.
• 8:56
  So what happened?
• 8:57
  He said, Well, you have to buy a car.
• 8:58
  Well, turns out that Gosh's father couldn't afford a car.
• 9:02
  He didn't have that much money.
• 9:04
  He did fairly well.
• 9:04
  He built malls in Communist Poland, of all things, he built malls.
• 9:08
  Uh, but he did pretty well.
• 9:10
  He's a contractor.
• 9:10
  He had his own home.
• 9:12
  He didn't live in a little apartment, actually at a good sized home.
• 9:14
  They still have that home.
• 9:16
  And uh, well, he's dead, but his mother is his wife's still, my wife's uh mother still has that home.
• 9:22
  And uh anyway, you couldn't afford to buy the bribe to get her into college.
• 9:28
  Uh, but the bribe to get her a student visa was a lot cheaper.
• 9:34
  So he did bribe somebody to get her a student visa.
• 9:37
  That's not something necessarily bad in Communist Poland at that time.
• 9:41
  That was the only way to get a visa.
• 9:43
  So don't look down on him for bribing.
• 9:45
  He was doing what he could for his daughter.
• 9:47
  And so she got uh a student visa, and then she applied to extend it.
• 9:51
  Eventually she got a green card.
• 9:54
  And then after I married her, I met her 20 years after she was here, by the way.
• 9:58
  People always ask me, do you meet her in the middle of the
• 10:00
  Military.
• 10:00
  No, I met her on e-Harmony 20 years after she had immigrated to the United States.
• 10:06
  And after we were married, she became a citizen.
• 10:11
  That's expensive, by the way.
• 10:12
  After the fees and everything, from from coming over in a student visa, getting the green card, everything else, all of the costs, it cost her about $10,000 to become legal, and then she became a citizen.
• 10:25
  And she became legal, you know, she she did all the paperwork and everything.
• 10:29
  That was 20 years ago.
• 10:30
  So if you want to come over legally today, I don't know if the fees have changed, but if you look at $10,000 20 years ago when she did it, those fees today, that's more like $16,000 in today's money, just going on an inflation calculator.
• 10:46
  So that's what it costs to immigrate to the United States from Poland legally.
• 10:52
  Now, my wife, as a legal immigrant, she has to pay taxes to cover the living expenses, the college costs, and the medical care of all of those who have immigrated into this country illegally.
• 11:06
  And because she came legally, she doesn't get that.
• 11:08
  Nobody pays to cover her living expenses or college or her medical care.
• 11:12
  She has to pay for that herself or me as a family.
• 11:15
  We have to pay for that.
• 11:17
  The government doesn't give her anything.
• 11:19
  So in addition to paying for the living expenses, college costs, and medical care of those who immigrated illegally, she has to pay for her own living expenses, college costs and medical care costs.
• 11:32
  And that's not just her.
• 11:34
  If you immigrate legally into the United States, you have to pay your own expenses.
• 11:40
  Whereas if you immigrate illegally, your living expenses, college costs, and medical expenses are picked up by the taxpayer.
• 11:47
  I want you to think about that for a moment.
• 11:49
  Think about the fact that a legal immigrant gets taxed heavily to pay for illegal immigrants, whereas illegal immigrants get all of that for free.
• 11:59
  If my wife could go back 20 years, she should have come in illegally.
• 12:02
  She should have she should have come in a student visa, just let it expire and forgotten all about it.
• 12:06
  And then today she could say, look, I'm an illegal immigrant.
• 12:09
  I want my free housing, I want food, I want you to take care of me.
• 12:14
  I want you to spend taxpayer money on me because I'm illegal, and that's what you do, and I should not have come legally because if if I come legally, you tax the shit out of me after I pay $16,000 for the privilege of being legal to cover those who did not pay anything, who did not go through the process, who are here illegally, and who should not be.
• 12:37
  Now I could talk about the shooting of Renee Good.
• 12:40
  Uh my perspective there is it's a tremendous tragedy that Renee Good is dead.
• 12:44
  I am never going to say it is a good thing when somebody is when somebody dies.
• 12:50
  Did she deserve it?
• 12:52
  I'm going to say no, she didn't deserve it.
• 12:54
  That doesn't mean that the police officer was not justified.
• 12:57
  That just means that she put herself in a situation she could not possibly control.
• 13:02
  I don't think she intended to hit the police officer with her car.
• 13:06
  I don't think she she obviously didn't want to get arrested, which is what they were trying to do when she decided to speed away.
• 13:11
  Uh but the point of the matter is she put herself in an impossible situation which she was obstructing justice.
• 13:18
  She was doing it all day when uh when police came, when federal police came, ICE agents, who are, by the way, federal police officers, when they finally decided to arrest her for obstructing justice.
• 13:31
  And don't believe all of the YouTube memes, although all the Facebook memes or whatever that you're seeing on this.
• 13:37
  These are federal police officers.
• 13:39
  They have the right to arrest for federal crimes.
• 13:42
  If they see the crime, they can arrest.
• 13:44
  If you obstruct justice, they can arrest.
• 13:46
  They do have arrest authority, not just for illegal aliens, but also for American citizens that do things like what uh what Renee Good did along with her wife, which was obstructing justice.
• 13:59
  So eventually they get sick of her obstructing justice, they decide to arrest.
• 14:03
  The guy that shot her, uh his name's Officer Ross, I believe, uh, he went around the car all the way.
• 14:09
  He was not in front of the car when she decided to flee.
• 14:12
  When other officers said, you know, get out of the car, get the F out of the car, and they were they're arresting her.
• 14:17
  What she did is she backed up.
• 14:18
  And if you watch the video, there are multiple angles of this.
• 14:20
  As she backed up, she also turned her car.
• 14:23
  My guess is that she was backing up, so she was probably looking behind her, whether in her rear view camera or over shoulder, rear view mirror, whatever.
• 14:30
  My guess is she was looking behind her as she was backing up, probably did not know that in the process of turning as she backed up, she also pointed her car directly at a federal officer.
• 14:40
  That was Officer Ross, the guy who ended up shooting her.
• 14:43
  Well, when she started going forward, her tires were still directly at him.
• 14:46
  So of course he thought she's running me over.
• 14:48
  Well, she turned the tires and tried to go around him, I think.
• 14:51
  She was trying, I don't think she was trying to run him over.
• 14:53
  I think she was trying to escape.
• 14:55
  Now, once you're under arrest, that's no longer supposed to be an option for you.
• 14:59
  You have the right to leave when they say get out of here.
• 15:02
  When you when you get to the point where they're like, okay, you've been obstructing uh justice all day, now we're going to arrest you.
• 15:08
  Once you get to that point, the smart thing is to say, okay, cool, I'm getting out of the car, arrest me.
• 15:13
  You're probably gonna you're gonna get booked, obviously.
• 15:15
  You're gonna get arraigned, uh, but you're also probably gonna get released and and probably just fine.
• 15:20
  Technically, it's a felon, technically, it's a whole slew of felons because she'd been doing it all day.
• 15:25
  Indications are they've been doing it the previous day.
• 15:27
  You know, her wife told the police officer, you know, that we don't change our we don't change our uh license plate.
• 15:33
  It'll be the same plate the next time you come back and see us.
• 15:36
  She indicated the wife did that they've been doing this for several days, would be back tomorrow, that this is what they do.
• 15:42
  They they obstruct justice, that's what they do.
• 15:45
  But I don't think the intent was to arrest her at a felony count of obstructing justice.
• 15:49
  I think it was just to get her out of the way.
• 15:51
  So she probably would have been arrested, arraigned, booked, released, and then and then given a fine.
• 15:57
  Well, that's not what she wanted.
• 15:59
  She wanted to leave as as her spouse said, uh, her wife said, you know, drive baby drive.
• 16:05
  Well, she did.
• 16:06
  She drove, and as she drove, she clipped the police officer who she had pointed the car at as she backed up, officer Ross, that is, and as she tried to go around him, she actually hit him with her car.
• 16:16
  Now, if you put yourself in Officer Ross's shoes, he sees the car back up pointing at him.
• 16:22
  The tires are directed at him, starts coming forward, and it's actually spinning the power tire on this SUV.
• 16:28
  Uh, it didn't have posse, it wasn't spinning two tires, it would have been spinning one, but it was spinning that tire, and and all of a sudden it's coming at him.
• 16:35
  Well, he of course draws his service weapon and and in self-defense fires at the person that uh is driving into him.
• 16:42
  Well, the person hits him.
• 16:44
  Uh Miss Good hit him.
• 16:45
  She hit him with it with a car, and and and he almost fell down.
• 16:48
  If you look at the video that he took, you can see that he almost fell down.
• 16:52
  If you see video from other people, he was able to maintain his footing.
• 16:55
  He did not fall over.
• 16:56
  But he was hit by the car.
• 16:58
  And uh, if you put hims yourself in his shoes, at the moment that car is speeding toward him, of course he feels that that he's in danger of death or serious injury from this, this car coming at him.
• 17:09
  And so he defended himself.
• 17:11
  He opened fire on her.
• 17:12
  Now, does that mean that she deserved to die?
• 17:14
  I don't think she was trying to hit him.
• 17:16
  I don't think that she was trying to put him in in jeopardy, but she did put him in jeopardy, and well, you know, that's what happened.
• 17:24
  If you if you put a police officer in jeopardy, your intentions don't matter.
• 17:28
  The fact that he is is potentially going to be killed or seriously injured is what matters to him, because he doesn't know what your intent is.
• 17:35
  He can't read your mind.
• 17:37
  And if you put a police officer in a position where he has a reason to think that it's his life or yours, that he's going to get seriously injured or killed if he doesn't defend himself.
• 17:46
  Well, nine out of ten times I think the police officer is going to shoot you, and maybe you don't deserve to die, uh, but that doesn't change the fact that he has every legal right to defend himself, and that is unfortunately what happened to Miss Good.
• 18:00
  Uh am I happy she's dead?
• 18:01
  No, I see as a terrible tragedy.
• 18:03
  But it's also a terrible tragedy for this poor police officer who is now being raked over the coals over social media, people calling him a murderer, people wanting to go after his family, people wanting to go after him.
• 18:14
  You know, this guy's got to live with the fact that he killed somebody.
• 18:17
  Was it self-defense?
• 18:18
  Yes.
• 18:18
  It was self-defense, and it was it was justified.
• 18:21
  But that doesn't mean he wanted to do it.
• 18:23
  He has to live with that for the rest of his life.
• 18:25
  That he was put in a position he was forced to kill somebody, and and he did so.
• 18:29
  And now this is a tragedy all the way around.
• 18:32
  I feel horrific for for the family of Miss Good.
• 18:35
  Uh certainly they didn't want her to die, certainly they probably didn't want her to protest other than the wife.
• 18:40
  I feel terrible for her three children, and uh, and I feel terrible for the police officer that was put in such a terrible situation that he had to take the life of somebody else.
• 18:50
  So, you know, a lot of people want to say it's one thing, it's the other thing.
• 18:54
  No, she didn't deserve to die.
• 18:55
  I don't think she was trying to hit him with her car, but she did hit him with her car, and and of course, as a police officer with a car coming at you, you have to do what you have to do.
• 19:03
  You have to defend yourself, and and so that's what happened.
• 19:06
  It was a terrible tragedy, and uh, I feel bad for everyone.
• 19:10
  But anyway, my wife came over, had to pay for the living and expenses of other people now because she did it the right way, and our country wants to give every incentive possible not to do it legally, but to do it illegally instead.
• 19:24
  So uh I wrote about Social Security forces us to allow illegal immigration several months ago.
• 19:30
  I also did a show on that, you might remember it.
• 19:33
  Uh, I'm not gonna get into all of that again, but suffice it to say that the system was designed for an ever-growing population, the social security system that is.
• 19:42
  And in order to keep it solvent, as our birth rates have dropped, and as people have lived longer, well, we have to import workers to keep the system solvent.
• 19:52
  Uh, during the illegal immigration peak under Joe Biden, the United States taxpayer was paying 195 billion dollars.
• 20:00
  A year that went through USAID into various NGOs, and that money, American taxpayer dollars from Joe Biden through NGOs, was used to illegally migrate millions and millions of people through South and Central America into the United States.
• 20:16
  So it wasn't just migrants happened.
• 20:18
  We know now that it was actually paid for by the American taxpayer at 195 billion dollars a year.
• 20:24
  Over four years, that's a lot of money.
• 20:26
  That's almost 800 billion dollars.
• 20:28
  It's a lot of money that we spent illegally migrating millions and millions of people into our country.
• 20:35
  And that's in addition, by the way, to the cost of supporting those illegal immigrants once they got here.
• 20:40
  So yeah, costs now are higher.
• 20:42
  We brought in billions of people or millions of people were paying their expenses.
• 20:46
  We paid to bring them in.
• 20:47
  It's absolutely insane.
• 20:49
  The European nations call their various versions of Social Security by the correct name.
• 20:54
  They call them pensions.
• 20:55
  But their systems are designed the same way ours is, where those currently working pay special taxes to cover the obligations of those who have retired.
• 21:05
  The economic need to pay those pensions with a shrinking workforce and an aging population is one of the reasons Europe, with our help destabilize the Middle East to create a massive migration of people from the Islamic world into Europe.
• 21:20
  And if you can hear my heater kicking on and off, I apologize for it.
• 21:23
  It's very cold in Michigan today.
• 21:25
  Anyway, modern immigration debates always begin from a false premise.
• 21:29
  Immigration is treated as a moral binary in which one is either pro-immigration or anti-immigration, compassionate or cruel, or some other such thing.
• 21:39
  Now, this framing is emotionally satisfying, of course, particularly if you're on the side that you think you're the compassionate pro-immigration one and everybody else is evil.
• 21:48
  But while it may be emotionally satisfying, I hate to say it, but it's emotion intellectually, ladies and gentlemen, it's useless.
• 21:56
  The question really should be whether or not we can assimilate immigrants at the pace needed to save our insolvent retirement system.
• 22:05
  Now, assimilation is a rate-dependent system.
• 22:08
  It's subject to limits in the same way any complex social system is.
• 22:12
  The moral quality of immigration policy, it can't be assessed without reference to the absorptive capacity of the nation being immigrated into.
• 22:22
  That's true, whether it's us, Germany, whatever.
• 22:24
  Ignoring the immigration capacity guarantees failure, causing disaster for both the immigrants as well as for the native population, be that of England, us, whatever.
• 22:37
  Assimulation is routinely misunderstood as well.
• 22:41
  It's not automatic, and it does not occur simply because newcomers arrive in a free society and say this is great.
• 22:48
  Doesn't work that way.
• 22:50
  Assimilation is a finite social capacity dependent on institutions, expectations, incentives, and perhaps most importantly, the confidence of the host culture in its own norms.
• 23:04
  Well, like any capacity, it can be exceeded.
• 23:08
  The critical variable is pace relative to assimilation capacity.
• 23:14
  In other words, how many people are coming in compared to how many people a country can absorb and assimilate?
• 23:19
  Below a certain threshold, assimilation is going to proceed.
• 23:23
  But above that threshold, the process will begin to break down.
• 23:27
  This is not a moral judgment.
• 23:28
  I'm not saying assimilation is.
• 23:30
  I'm not saying that immigration is good, I'm not saying immigration is bad.
• 23:33
  I'm not making a moral judgment.
• 23:35
  What I'm talking about is a structural reality.
• 23:39
  Societies can ignore these consequences.
• 23:41
  But we need only look to Europe to see what the costs of doing so are.
• 23:46
  When immigration exceeds a society's assimilation threshold, the character of the society changes.
• 23:53
  Responsibility begins to shift away from individuals and communities and toward institutions.
• 23:59
  Informal norms give way to formal rules, and judgment becomes replaced by procedure.
• 24:05
  Over time, administration expands and attempt to manage what culture no longer can.
• 24:10
  In a healthy system, people come over at a slow enough pace that they see our culture.
• 24:14
  Maybe the immigrants don't adopt it, but their kids do.
• 24:17
  By the time you get to their grandkids, they're no different than any other American.
• 24:20
  They've lost the language of their of their grandparents, and maybe they still have the recipes.
• 24:25
  I've got an amazing Coco Vin recipe from Quebec, but I stuck French in high school, but I mean I am an American.
• 24:32
  I am not a French Canadian.
• 24:33
  I have a French Canadian name, but I am an American, and I am only an American, and that is what generally happens.
• 24:40
  You maintain maybe pieces of the culture, like a family recipe, but the culture itself, you become an American.
• 24:47
  If that administrative layer fails, if assimilation no longer occurs, well, it it inevitably will fail.
• 24:56
  The administrative layer inevitably will fail under sustained pressure.
• 25:00
  And if that happens, if the administrative layer fails, culture has failed now, and the administrative layer has as well.
• 25:08
  The only remaining tool is coercion.
• 25:10
  That's how you keep the peace, coercion.
• 25:12
  It's the only tool left once a culture fails, that stimulation that is in the administrative layer.
• 25:18
  And this is a trajectory that modern societies enter.
• 25:23
  Not because they're hateful, not because they're xenophobic, but because they refuse to think in systems rather than slogans.
• 25:30
  They say, you know, we are a welcoming people, so we're welcoming them in.
• 25:33
  Sweden doesn't have a culture of its own.
• 25:35
  Sweden is for the immigrants.
• 25:37
  These are actual things that the cultural ambassador of Sweden and that the president of Sweden have said.
• 25:43
  So, no, when when it's it's the trajectory fails because of those slogans, because people are not thinking in systems.
• 25:54
  So we're going to think in systems.
• 25:57
  Let's start with the assimilation threshold.
• 25:59
  The most persistent mistake in immigration debates is the belief that good intentions override scale.
• 26:05
  They do not.
• 26:07
  Intentions may matter from a purely moral perspective, but they matter very little systemically.
• 26:13
  Systems respond to pressure.
• 26:15
  They do not respond to sentiment.
• 26:17
  There's also a difference between something feeling good and something doing good.
• 26:22
  Many things that may feel good to the uninformed can actually do a great deal of harm if implemented.
• 26:28
  Conversely, some of the things that do a great deal of good may feel very counterintuitive to the uninformed.
• 26:36
  We look at, for example, do we want to raise or lower the minimum wage?
• 26:40
  Should we have a minimum wage?
• 26:41
  Well, raising somebody's wage sounds very good to the uninformed, but it takes the entry rungs of getting into work away from those who are not yet working and can actually do a great deal of harm.
• 26:52
  And particularly in the long term.
• 26:54
  This is why we have the saying that, you know, that hell the path to hell is paved with good intentions.
• 27:00
  That's exactly why.
• 27:01
  And I talked about term.
• 27:03
  There are short-term first-level effects from any given policy as well as longer-term second, third or higher level effects.
• 27:11
  One thing causes another, causes another, causes another, and you get the second, third and what have you effects.
• 27:16
  Often the short-term effects of a given policy are the opposite of the long-term effects.
• 27:22
  So lower interest rates from the Fed, for example, bring down lending costs initially, but over time it increases the rate of inflation, which increases lending costs.
• 27:31
  So often the short-term and the long-term effects are the exact opposite of one another when we're talking about things like economics and we're talking about today, a simulation.
• 27:41
  It is entirely understandable when individuals who may not know a great deal about a particular topic vote based on what feels good or vote only based on the short-term effects.
• 27:53
  It is, however, incumbent upon those in elected office or an unelected government positions to go beyond feeling good and inform themselves and actually what actually does good in the long-term for society at large.
• 28:07
  What a wonderful thing would be if politicians did that.
• 28:10
  At a minimum, assimilation requires several non-negotiables.
• 28:13
  The first is that the immigrant must subordinate their own moral framework to that of the host country, at least in the public sphere.
• 28:20
  This does not mean abandoning private belief or cultural memory, but it does mean accepting the host nation's norms govern public life.
• 28:28
  Without this moral subordination, a simulation can't even begin.
• 28:33
  Language acquisition is equally essential.
• 28:35
  A shared language is not just a tool for communication, but it's the mechanism by which cultural norms and expectations are transmitted.
• 28:43
  Trust depends on being understood.
• 28:45
  So societies that fracture linguistically fractures socially as well.
• 28:49
  Finally, simulation requires institutional trust.
• 28:52
  Immigrants must view the host society's legal, political, and civic institutions as legitimate, even when those institutions act against their immediate interests.
• 29:03
  If courts, police, schools, and laws are regarded as alien or hostile, well, parallel systems will inevitably emerge, as we have seen.
• 29:13
  The assimilation threshold or the point at which absorption gives way to fragmentation, it varies significantly based on those and other factors.
• 29:23
  And of course, those were cultural distance matters.
• 29:27
  Cultural distance does matter.
• 29:29
  But immigrants from societies with similar social norms or expectations of civic behavior with similar conceptions of individual responsibility, they assimilate more easily and more quickly than from those societies organized around fundamentally different assumptions.
• 29:46
  So the cultural distance does matter.
• 29:49
  What matters more though is moral compatibility.
• 29:53
  Difference in cuisine, clothing, and custom are trivial compared to differences in how authority, law, individual.
• 30:00
  Individual rights and moral obligations are understood.
• 30:03
  Where moral frameworks align assimilation is smooth, but where they conflict, assimilation becomes difficult at best and impossible at worst.
• 30:14
  The confidence of the host culture, of course, may be the most decisive factor of all, as a society that asserts its norms unapologetically and that expects newcomers to conform to them can absorb far more people than can a society plagued by self-doubt.
• 30:30
  Also far more difference than a society plagued by self-doubt.
• 30:35
  Moral confidence simply raises the assimilation threshold, whereas moral uncertainty lowers it.
• 30:41
  Finally, expectations matter.
• 30:43
  A culture that expects assimilation tends to get it.
• 30:46
  A culture that insists on neutrality, treating all norms as moral equally equivalent.
• 30:50
  You know, cultural load, they call it multiculturalism, you know, or a society that fears asserting its own standards upon newcomers.
• 30:58
  It's not even really looking for assimilation, and what is no longer expected tends to not occur.
• 31:04
  The key insight is this.
• 31:06
  Weak moral confidence dramatically lowers the assimilation threshold, and even modest immigration levels can overwhelm a society that no longer believes it has the right to shape those who enter it.
• 31:19
  I'll say that again.
• 31:20
  The key insight weak moral confidence dramatically lowers the assimilation threshold, and even modest immigration levels can overwhelm a society that no longer believes it has the right to shape those who enter it.
• 31:32
  Once the threshold is crossed, the problem is not solved by compassion or good intentions.
• 31:38
  Instead, the society begins to balkanize around different nor moral norms, until the only way to keep the society from tearing itself apart is through totalitarianism.
• 31:47
  Yugoslavia is a case study in totalitarianism and balkanization.
• 31:51
  Tito tried to keep the country together through totalitarian force, and he did so very successfully.
• 31:57
  But when he died, Yugoslavia split into regions and almost immediately went to war, most notably with Serbia invading and trying to ethnically cleanse Bosnia.
• 32:07
  Yugoslavia started with different moral orders.
• 32:09
  You had Eastern Orthodox, the primary religion in the Serbian region, Roman Catholicism in the Croatian region, Islam in Bosnia, and secularism in Slovenia.
• 32:19
  The greatest conflict came between the Orthodox and the Eastern Orthodox and the Islamic religions.
• 32:26
  And with that, ladies and gentlemen, it's time for a word from our sponsors.
• 32:29
  You can reach our sponsors directly by going to America Outloud.news slash shop or by clicking the shop button at the top of the website.
• 32:38
  Don't go anywhere.
• 32:39
  We got a lot to cover, and we're going to get right back into it on the other side.
• 32:43
  This is Dr.
• 32:44
  Peter McCullough.
• 32:45
  You know me from America Outloud Pulse and the McCullough Report.
• 32:49
  Well, I'm inviting you to join me in Nashville, July 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, for a truly historic experience in 2026.
• 32:57
  America Outloud News 250 slash 10, Nashville.
• 33:01
  I'm calling all patriots to be a part of this unforgettable weekend, packed with inspired entertainment, incredible fireworks, and nationally recognized speakers who proudly stand for freedom.
• 33:13
  Together with you and our partners, Clear and the Wellness Company, we'll celebrate two major milestones.
• 33:19
  250 years of America and 10 years of America Out Loud News, led by Malcolm Out Loud.
• 33:26
  I can't wait to see you there, because your presence matters and you are family.
• 33:31
  So make history with me and Malcolm.
• 33:33
  Register now at AmericaOut Loud.news forward slash Nashville.
• 33:38
  That's America Outloud.news forward slash Nashville.
• 33:41
  We'll see you there.
• 33:43
  Feeling off lately, bloated, brain fog, low energy?
• 33:46
  It could be parasites.
• 33:48
  The sound invaders that weaken your gut, immune system, and mental clarity.
• 33:51
  That's why Dr.
• 33:52
  Peter McCullough and the doctors at the wellness company formulated Ivermectin and Mabendazol Cleanse, a medical grade solution designed to help eliminate parasites and restore balance.
• 34:01
  No gimmicks, just real medicine trusted by top doctors.
• 34:04
  Go to TWC.health forward slash outloud and use code outloud for 20% off your first order.
• 34:11
  Take control of your health today.
• 34:12
  Have you been looking for a healthy snack for on the go?
• 34:14
  But all the energy and protein bars are just too sweet and full of sugar, preservatives, and mystery ingredients.
• 34:20
  Well, not all energy bars are soft and sugary.
• 34:22
  Bear bars are a crunchy, savory bar made from just six simple natural ingredients, made with veggies, nuts, and seeds.
• 34:28
  Bear bars are a plant-based, organic, gluten-free, contain six grams of protein, and are low temp dried for a unique crunch.
• 34:35
  To learn more, just visit barebar.com forward slash out loud and get the exclusive discount just for America Out Loud listeners.
• 34:42
  That's B-E-A-R-B-A-R.com forward slash out loud.
• 34:47
  Virus protection and immune boosting just got easier.
• 34:50
  Enter the Daily V stack.
• 34:52
  Using cellular absorption technology, we put vitamins A, C, D, zinc, and Quircetin together with a multi-mineral complex for complete protection.
• 35:02
  The Daily V stack is basically an oral IV of six products, all in one at an affordable price.
• 35:08
  Go to ChemicalFreeBody.com forward slash out loud, get the daily V stack, protect yourself, boost your immune system, and save 20% on your first order.
• 35:19
  Oral hygiene hasn't changed in 50 years, but our diet and the way we eat has.
• 35:24
  Creating an environment in your mouth for bacteria to wreck havoc on your teeth and gums.
• 35:29
  For better oral health, get sprayed dental defense, an oral care line designed to combat acid-creating bacteria.
• 35:37
  The toothpaste, mouthwash, mints, and gum, all contain xylitol, and natural ingredients shown to dramatically improve oral health.
• 35:45
  Sprite can be found online and at all fine natural retailers.
• 35:49
  In a world of rising prices, you can still grow abundance.
• 35:53
  I'm Doug Evans, author of the national bestseller, The Sprout Book.
• 35:57
  Sprouts grow in three to five days without soil, sunshine, or fertilizer on your kitchen countertop for under a dollar serving.
• 36:06
  Take control of your food and your future.
• 36:09
  Visit the sprouting company.com slash out loud and use the code out loud for an exclusive offer.
• 36:16
  Grow food, not fear.
• 36:20
  Never before.
• 36:30
  At law, under a relentless and pernicious siege from those carrying the banners of socialism, and Marxism.
• 36:38
  America Rotlaud.news is the antidote to these poison is America Outloud.
• 36:48
  Is that place to awaken your heart, soul, and mind to the outloud troll.
• 36:58
  Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to Cutting Through the Chaos and the America Out Loud Network.
• 37:02
  I'm your host Wallace Garnot, and we're talking about the assimilation threshold.
• 37:07
  Before the break, we were talking about what the assimilation threshold is.
• 37:12
  Let's talk today about liberal democracy's moral foundation.
• 37:15
  One of the most damaging myths in modern political thought is the belief that liberal democracy emerged from some moral neutrility.
• 37:23
  It did not.
• 37:25
  Neutrity was not the starting addition that was at best a downstream luxury.
• 37:30
  You see, every functioning liberal democracy in modern history emerged from a Christian moral substrate.
• 37:35
  That, by the way, is not a theological claim, it's an historical one.
• 37:38
  It is absolutely true.
• 37:40
  Every liberal democracy in modern history emerged from a Christian moral substrate.
• 37:46
  Long before we had constitutions, courts, or parliaments, Christian moral assumptions had already shaped how law and responsibility were understood in the societies that labored later became liberal democracies.
• 37:58
  The core assumptions that make liberal democracies possible were inherited from Christian ethics, and then they were translated later into civic form.
• 38:06
  The idea of individual dignity, it's not self-evident.
• 38:10
  It rests on the belief that each person possesses intrinsic worth by virtue of being human.
• 38:16
  That belief did not originate in enlightenment philosophy.
• 38:19
  No, it came from Christian from Christianity's assertion that every person is made in the image of God.
• 38:27
  Equality before the law, likewise did not emerge from civic discourse.
• 38:31
  Historically, law reflected caste.
• 38:33
  Christianity undermined caste by insisting on moral equality before a higher authority, that's God, and that supplanted social hierarchies.
• 38:42
  Liberal democracies later secularized that moral claim to legal equality, but the actual caste breakdown, the actual thought of us being equal before a higher authority, that's Christianity.
• 38:54
  Finally, liberal democracy depends on the elevation of conscience over coercion.
• 39:00
  Christianity, uniquely among the world religions at the time, renounced forced belief on the assumption that force led to corruption.
• 39:09
  That theological principle later became the foundation for both the freedoms of speech and the freedom of religion, because coarse belief is by definition, it's not free.
• 39:20
  The Enlightenment did not replace Christian morality, by the way, it secularized it, stripping away theology while retaining the moral architecture of Christianity.
• 39:29
  The institutions remain functional only so long, though, as the underlying moral assumptions remain widely shared.
• 39:36
  This is why John Adams said we are not a Christian nation, but we are a nation of Christians.
• 39:42
  The fact that we have that moral value, or those that moral system, those moral assumptions, the fact that we share those, if they are widely shared, is critical to the continuation of our society.
• 39:55
  Which brings us to what is often cited as an exception, the state of Israel.
• 40:00
  The laws of Moses, however, can be broken up into civil law for the governing of the ancient state of Israel, a ceremonial law designed to separate God's chosen people from the other peoples of the earth, and moral law.
• 40:12
  And this is where we get into maybe Israel isn't so different at all, and maybe it's not an exception.
• 40:17
  Israel stands as the one modern liberal democracy that did not arise from a Christian culture, yet it functions for the same reason Western liberal democracies historically did.
• 40:28
  Judaism shares the same moral law.
• 40:33
  Judaism and Christianity, in fact, are morally identical.
• 40:36
  They agree on the nature of human dignity, the objectivity of moral law, the limits on power, and the illegitimacy of coercive belief.
• 40:46
  Christianity did not invent a new moral framework.
• 40:49
  It universalized the Jewish one.
• 40:51
  Nobody argues that Judaism and Christianity are the same religion, but Christianity was born out of Judaism, and a lot of theological scholars to this day point out that what these religions share in many ways makes them act functionally almost like separate sex of the same religion rather than separate religions entirely.
• 41:12
  Now, they are not sexes, they do have fundamentally different beliefs in the nature of the Messiah and thus the nature of man's relationship with God.
• 41:20
  But the moral foundations are shared.
• 41:24
  And because of this shared moral foundation, liberal institutions can function in Israel in ways they cannot, where the moral law is contested or where it's subordinate to political or religious authority.
• 41:36
  This point matters.
• 41:38
  Liberal democracy is not merely a set of procedures.
• 41:41
  No, it's a moral system that presupposes shared limits.
• 41:45
  Courts only function if their authority is recognized as legitimate.
• 41:49
  Rights only exist if restraint is viewed as virtuous.
• 41:52
  Liberal institutions cannot float freely above culture.
• 41:56
  They are anchored to it.
• 41:57
  When the culture that sustains them erodes, neutrality does not save them.
• 42:01
  Administration replaces norms, coercion replaces consent, and the system then only survives by force.
• 42:08
  Force being what keeps these competing moral standards from tearing each other apart.
• 42:13
  Liberal democracy, it did not begin neutral, and it cannot remain stable once neutrality is elevated above our moral inheritance.
• 42:22
  That fact explains both our historical success as well as Western society's present fragility.
• 42:29
  Let's talk about moral compatibility, it's not mere tolerance.
• 42:33
  Modern immigration debates lean heavily on the language of tolerance.
• 42:38
  The assumption is that if a society sufficiently open-minded and culturally diverse populations will coexist peacefully and over time just naturally converge.
• 42:48
  This assumption rests on a fundamental error by treating all differences as if they are equivalent.
• 42:55
  They are not.
• 42:57
  Some differences are trivial, as we said earlier from the standpoint of social cohesion.
• 43:01
  Differences in food, dress, music, accent, and custom pose no threat to a liberal society.
• 43:09
  They are cosmetic variations so that sit comfortably atop a shared civic framework.
• 43:14
  Even linguistic differences, while significant, are manageable so long as language acquisition proceeds and a shared public language emerges.
• 43:23
  These are the differences that most people have in mind speak about diversity, but these are not the differences that determine whether a society holds together.
• 43:32
  What matters is moral compatibility.
• 43:35
  A liberal democracy can tolerate an enormous range of cultural expression, but it cannot function if multiple competing claims to ultimate moral authority coexist within the same legal and civic space.
• 43:49
  Now, assimilation does not require immigrants to abandon private religious faith.
• 43:54
  It does, however, require the acceptance of the host society's ultimate authority in the public sphere.
• 44:02
  At a minimum, assimilation requires the acceptance of the supremacy of civil law over religious or customary law.
• 44:10
  It requires acceptance of free speech, including speech that offends or even that blasphemes.
• 44:17
  It requires acceptance of freedom of religion, which necessarily includes the freedom to leave one's religion.
• 44:23
  These are not optional features of liberal democracy.
• 44:27
  They are foundational.
• 44:28
  They define the moral boundaries within which pluralism is possible.
• 44:32
  Any system of belief that rejects these commitments cannot coexist as an equal authority without undermining society at large.
• 44:41
  This leads to a simple but uncomfortable reality.
• 44:44
  Any moral system that claims total jurisdiction over human life must either dissolve or fail to assimilate, as there is no stable equilibrium in which two sovereign moral authorities can peacefully share the same civic space outside of totalitarianism.
• 45:01
  Now here's an important point.
• 45:02
  At small numbers, assimilation is always the dominant force.
• 45:06
  Social pressure then flows in one direction from the host culture toward the immigrant.
• 45:11
  Incentives reward conformity and nonconformity carries tremendous cost.
• 45:33
  This is how assimilation is historically worked, but when the numbers of immigrants are too high, the dynamics invert.
• 45:40
  As population size increases, well, immigrants no longer experience the host culture as a surrounding force.
• 45:46
  Instead, the experience is one environment among many.
• 45:50
  Internal institutions emerge, including religious authorities, schools, media outlets, advocacy organizations, and informal enforcement mechanisms.
• 46:00
  What was once cultural memory then becomes cultural infrastructure.
• 46:04
  At this point, ideology no longer weakens across generations.
• 46:08
  No, it self-reinforces.
• 46:09
  Children are socialized internally before they ever meaningfully encounter the broader society.
• 46:15
  Norms are taught intentionally rather than absorbed, and deviations are corrected by the immigrant community to prevent dissimulation.
• 46:23
  Most importantly, internal dissent becomes very costly.
• 46:27
  The pressure to conform no longer comes from the outside.
• 46:31
  No, now it comes from within, making a simulation an act of defection.
• 46:36
  Scale is the pivot point.
• 46:38
  If 10 million are introduced at once and then concentrated geographically, well, they establish institutions, they transmit doctrine intentionally, and they work to preserve and extend their worldview.
• 46:49
  Of course they do.
• 46:50
  If ten are committed ideologically, well, even if they're ideological extremists, if you place ten people into liberal society, what happens?
• 46:59
  Their ideology will dissolve over subsequent generations because social pressure overwhelms their children and grandchildren.
• 47:06
  In most cases, their grandchildren can barely even remember the original belief system, no matter how extreme it might have been.
• 47:13
  We can see a case study of this by looking at Ham Tramic.
• 47:17
  Shortly after I met my wife, she asked me if I wanted to go to, or she told me rather she had to go to Ham Tramok.
• 47:22
  She'd lived in Ham Tramic for years before moving into the suburbs, and at this time her brother still lived there.
• 47:28
  Now, having grown up on the west side of Michigan, my mind made no differentiation between Detroit proper and all of the suburbs, and I had never heard of Ham Tramic, but that name has kind of a phonetically New England vibe to it, so when she said she had to go to Ham Tramic, somehow I thought she meant something in Connecticut.
• 47:45
  Well, she asked me I wanted to go with her, and we have a little bit of an embarrassing conversation.
• 47:49
  I told her I couldn't take the time off of work to go to Connecticut.
• 47:52
  She had no idea what I was talking about.
• 47:54
  She's like, you know, Ham Trampic is right down by Detroit.
• 47:57
  I was shocked to find out it's only 20 minutes away.
• 48:00
  Now Connecticut's a lot further than that.
• 48:02
  Um but the point is that for more than a century, Ham Tramic functioned as an entry enclave.
• 48:07
  New immigrant groups settled there because it was affordable and it was close to industrial work.
• 48:13
  Amtramic was never the destination, though.
• 48:15
  It was simply the first rung on the ladder for new immigrants.
• 48:18
  Germans, Poles, and other European immigrants passed through Ham Tramic in successive waves.
• 48:24
  They clustered initially out of necessity, relying on shared language and community support, while they established themselves economically, but as upward mobility came, movement followed.
• 48:35
  And the direction of that movement matters.
• 48:37
  It was upward and outward.
• 48:38
  As Polish immigrants, their children and their grandchildren accumulated wealth, they dispersed in surrounding suburbs such as Birmingham, Troy, and Rochester Hills.
• 48:47
  Ethnic identity then softened into heritage.
• 48:50
  Language is often retained for a generation, but usually not two.
• 48:54
  What matters here is the pattern repeated reliably across immigrant groups for generations.
• 49:00
  Hamtramic was a temporary incubator.
• 49:02
  It was not a permanent cultural island.
• 49:05
  But now that pattern is changed.
• 49:07
  More recently, immigration to Hamtramck does not show the same outward diffusion.
• 49:11
  Instead of upward mobility leading to dispersion into the surrounding region, growth increasingly takes the form of lateral contiguous expansion.
• 49:20
  Population increase spills outward while remaining geographically and culturally connected to the original enclave.
• 49:26
  The community grows, but it doesn't dissolve.
• 49:29
  Hamptramic and Dearborn are today both parts of the same Islamic enclave.
• 49:34
  And this distinction is critical.
• 49:36
  Lateral expansion preserves internal authority structures.
• 49:39
  Cultural norms are reinforced rather than diluted, and exposure to the host culture is reduced.
• 49:45
  As population density rises, rather than serving as a bridge into American society, the enclave becomes self sustaining.
• 49:54
  As a result, cultural authority remains internal.
• 49:57
  Now, that's not to say Muslims are not compatible.
• 50:00
  With our society, but it is to say that fundamentalists within Islam are not, and that the more devout someone gets toward Islam, the less compatible with civilization they become.
• 50:11
  That's not a judgment about the character or intentions of the people involved.
• 50:15
  It's an observation about systems.
• 50:17
  When immigration remains below the assimilation threshold, enclaves function as gateways.
• 50:22
  When that threshold is exceeded, enclaves cease to be transitional and instead become destinations.
• 50:28
  At that point, assimilation is not merely slow, it changes direction.
• 50:33
  Hamptramic matters because it shows a shift in real time at the neighborhood level, where abstractions give way to lived reality.
• 50:41
  And though I pick on ham tramac, that's because it's close to home.
• 50:44
  Similar patterns of both assimilation and its opposite occur all across the United States.
• 50:52
  Let's go from failed assimilation to administrative control.
• 50:55
  When a simulation fails, societies do not collapse immediately.
• 50:59
  They attempt to compensate.
• 51:00
  And at first the response is fragmented of to a fragmented society is simply administration.
• 51:06
  As moral consensus erodes, the informal systems that once govern life lose their authority.
• 51:12
  Norms no longer bind because they are no longer shared.
• 51:14
  What was once enforced socially, now becomes enforced procedurally.
• 51:19
  Norms then are replaced by rules.
• 51:21
  Where behavior is once shaped by expectation and shame, all of a sudden it's shaped by policy and compliance.
• 51:26
  Where communities once mediated conflict directly, now institutions step into referee.
• 51:32
  The role of government expands, not because it seeks power, but because something must manage the differences between different moral systems after culture no longer can.
• 51:41
  This is the phase often described as multiculturalism, but it is more accurately understood as administrative multiculturalism.
• 51:48
  Diversity is no longer sustained through shared moral limits, but through regulation.
• 51:53
  Disagreement is not resolved so much as it is suppressed.
• 51:56
  Now, this arrangement can persist for a time.
• 51:58
  In fact, it can feel deceptively stable.
• 52:00
  Procedure gives the impression of fairness, but that's fragile.
• 52:04
  As parallel communities solidify administrative systems are increasingly asked to perform moral arbitration without moral authority.
• 52:11
  Every rule starts to look partisan.
• 52:14
  Every enforcement decision is interpreted as favoring one group over another, and this is particularly true once different rules emerge for different groups and the law is selectively enforced.
• 52:24
  At that stage, parallel identities harden.
• 52:27
  People no longer see themselves primarily as participants in a shared civic order, but as members of competing groups within it.
• 52:33
  Law is no longer perceived as impartial.
• 52:36
  It's viewed as a weapon or a shield, depending on who wields it.
• 52:40
  As trust collapses, politics transforms.
• 52:42
  It ceases to be a debate about policy, it becomes demographic warfare.
• 52:46
  Votes are counted less as expressions of preference and more as expressions of groove power group power.
• 52:52
  At that point, the society has three choices.
• 52:55
  It will either have coercive unity, that's the Tito model, that's when you have totalitarianism.
• 53:02
  The second is fragmentation.
• 53:04
  The shared civic space dissolves.
• 53:06
  Communities separate either formally or informally, and uh the state shrinks, splits, and then disappears.
• 53:12
  That's what happened to Yugoslavia.
• 53:15
  Uh the last option then is complete totalitarianism, and uh, well, that kind of administration is not the opposite of Balkanization.
• 53:24
  It's actually the last attempt prevent it.
• 53:27
  Uh when the administration fails, what remains is simply power exercised openly, or fragmentation embraced reluctantly.
• 53:36
  There is no other path.
• 53:38
  Now let's talk about the choices we have, what nations must choose.
• 53:42
  The old English or the old Michigan jokes at the beginning of this, uh, they work because they're harmless, West versus East, youpers versus trolls.
• 53:51
  These are friendly rivalries, but they exist inside a shared culture.
• 53:55
  Nobody seriously believes Michigan is going to split into warring states because the upper peninsula feels neglected, or because Detroit thinks everything west of Lansing is Indiana.
• 54:05
  No, those divisions matter specifically because they don't matter.
• 54:08
  And that's a distinction that I'm talking about.
• 54:10
  Nations do not face a thousand choices at once.
• 54:13
  They face a narrowing sequence of them.
• 54:16
  First comes a choice between assimilation and administration.
• 54:20
  A society can expect newcomers to adopt its norms and moral limits, or it can attempt to manage the differences indefinitely through policy, regulation, and procedure.
• 54:30
  Assimilation requires confidence and clarity, but administration does not.
• 54:34
  Still comes at a cost, though.
• 54:36
  When administration expands far enough, the next choice appears: administration or coercion.
• 54:41
  Rules only work while they are viewed as legitimate.
• 54:45
  Once they are seen as partisan or imposed, well then the rules they stop working, and enforcement becomes necessary because all of a sudden they're seen as imposed.
• 54:54
  At that point, surveillance grows, speech narrows, dissent is reframed as destabilization.
• 55:00
  The society may remain intact, but only because force replaces consent.
• 55:06
  And uh when coercion can no longer hold, the final choice emerges between tyranny or fracture.
• 55:13
  At that point, unity survives only as containment.
• 55:16
  Remove the pressure and the system breaks apart along the moral and cultural seams that immigration without assimilation created.
• 55:24
  A society unwilling to defend its moral foundation, simply put will not remain free.
• 55:30
  It will become managed, then coerced, and finally divided.
• 55:34
  The question that nations face, including our own, is not whether they wish to be compassionate, tolerant, or diverse.
• 55:42
  The question is whether they believe in themselves strongly enough to remain whole.
• 55:48
  And ladies and gentlemen, whether or not we remain a whole is a choice we will have to make, and once we make that choice, everything else follows.
• 55:57
  So when somebody calls you a xenophobe, say no, I believe in immigration, I just believe in legal immigration, and I believe that those who immigrate have a moral obligation to, over at least the next couple of generations, they have a moral obligation to assimilate and to become American.
• 56:16
  And just like that, ladies and gentlemen, we are out of time.
• 56:20
  But that's okay.
• 56:21
  I got through the in the entire thing.
• 56:23
  We talked about the assimilation threshold, we talked about the levels at which we can bring people in and have them assimilate, and we talked about the factors that reduce those levels and create fragmentation.
• 56:35
  As always, thank you for tuning in.
• 56:37
  Please tell others who might be interested in cutting through the chaos to listen in, either on Saturday and Sunday at 9 a.m.
• 56:44
  Eastern Standard Time, on Sunday at 10 p.m.
• 56:47
  Eastern Standard Time, which is a rerun, or on podcast whenever they have time.
• 56:53
  And we'll see you next week at the same time and place, where will once again be time to get involved and to get loud on America out loud.