Nancy Pelosi gave a marathon speech on
illegal immigration the other day. But how would she know much about the
realities of open borders, given her palatial retreat in Northern California
and multi-millionaire lifestyle that allows wealthy progressives like herself
to be exempt from the consequences of her own hectoring? In the end, the House
minority leader was reduced to some adolescent racialist patter about her
grandson wishing to look more like his Mexican-American friend.
I was
thinking of the San Francisco Democrat’s speech last week, during a brief drive
into our local town, in a region that is ground zero of California’s illegal immigration
experience.
Illegal
immigrants are neither collective saints nor sinners, but simply individuals
who arrive from one of the poorest regions in the Americas, without legality or
much in the way of English, or high school education.
They
encounter an American host that has lost confidence in its once formidable
powers of assimilation and integration as well as its ability to mint Americans
from diverse races, religions, and ethnicities. Instead, American culture has
adopted an arrogant sense that it can ensure near instant parity as redemption
for supposed past –isms and –ologies. That may explain the
immigrant’s romance for Mexico to which he fights any return, and the ambiguity
about America in which he fights to stay.
We dare not
mention illegal immigration in California as a factor in the state’s implosion.
But privately, residents assume it has something to do with the 20 percent of
the state’s population that lives below the poverty level. Illegal
immigration plays a role in the fact that one-third of the nation’s welfare
recipients lives in California and that one of four state residents was not
born in the United States—or that one-half of all immigrant households receives
some sort of government assistance, and that one in four homeless people lives
in California.
Note a
final statistic. A record of nearly $30 billion a year is forecast to be sent
this year as remittances home to Mexico. If the sum is assumed to be wired
largely by the reported 11 million illegal aliens, then illegal immigrants are
sending per capita around $2,700 home per year. Again, in per capita terms, a
household of five would average about $1,100 sent home per month to
Mexico—a generosity impossible without the subsidies of the American taxpayer.
(Some might wonder whether the U.S. could tax that sum to build the wall or at
least declare that proof of remittances disqualifies one for public support.)
Much Ruin
in a State
On the way to town, I passed three neighbors’ parcels. All have something in common: several families are living on lots zoned for single-family residences in an array of illegal sheds, shacks, and stationary trailers. The premises are characterized by illegal dumping, zoning and building code violations, illegal electrical hook-ups, and petty misdemeanors of unlicensed dogs and strays. I remember similar such rural settlements from my early youth in the 1950s, over a decade after the final end of the Great Depression. Now, in our back-to-the-future state, we see some concrete reminders of what my parents used to relate about life in the 1930s.
On the way to town, I passed three neighbors’ parcels. All have something in common: several families are living on lots zoned for single-family residences in an array of illegal sheds, shacks, and stationary trailers. The premises are characterized by illegal dumping, zoning and building code violations, illegal electrical hook-ups, and petty misdemeanors of unlicensed dogs and strays. I remember similar such rural settlements from my early youth in the 1950s, over a decade after the final end of the Great Depression. Now, in our back-to-the-future state, we see some concrete reminders of what my parents used to relate about life in the 1930s.
In this
strange “day in the life” melodrama, at the dry cleaner in town, a car collided
with mine in the parking lot. We both got out to inspect the fender-bender
damage (he had more damage—maybe in the range of $500-800—than I did—probably
around $400). I showed him my license, registration, and insurance
authentication and asked him to do the same to complete the exchange of
information.
But he
seemed either to have no license, registration or insurance authentication or
was reluctant to show me what he had. I suggested then that we call the police
to verify our likely insurance claims, and let them determine whether either
one of us was at fault. He said no and suggested instead cash, as if perceived
comparative damage outweighed assigning culpability. He spoke limited English.
I gave him $50 in cash (all I had in my wallet) and he sped out. I figured that
my damage would not have exceeded the insurance deductible and his was likely
greater. I suppose he felt a possible insurance claim was not worth even
theoretical exposure to deportation. Our negotiation was calm and respectful.
On the way
home, I went a different route. The roadside of an adjoining farm parcel has
become a veritable dump: I stopped and counted the following sorts of trash
piled by the almond orchard: two infant car seats; one entertainment center,
three bags of wet garbage, one mattress, one stroller, five tires, and a stack
of broken cement, paint cans, and drywall.
Pulling
into my driveway, I noticed that a pit bull mix had been dumped at my house
during my brief absence (I have already five rescue dogs). We called the animal
control officer and are waiting for a reply. I think the result will be
predictable, as in the case of my recent misadventure in purchasing expensive
solar panels: though they were installed over three months ago, I am still
waiting for Pacific Gas and Electric Co., the local utility, to hook the idled
system to the grid.
Some time
ago I was bitten by two dogs while biking down a rural avenue nearby. The
animals’ owners did not speak English, refused to tie up the unlicensed and
unvaccinated biters, and in fact let their other dogs out, one of which also
bit me. It took four calls to various legal authorities and a local
congressional rep to have the dogs quarantined in an effort to avoid rabies
shots. The owners were never cited.
The
California solution is always the same: the law-abiding must adjust to the
non-law-abiding. So I quit riding out here and they kept their unvaccinated,
unlicensed, and untied dogs.
All that is
a pretty typical day, in a way that would have been atypical some 40 years ago.
Traveling
Halfway in Reverse
In California, civilization is speeding in reverse—well aside from the decrepit infrastructure, dismal public schools, and sky-high home prices. Or rather, the state travels halfway in reverse: anything involving the private sector (smartphones, Internet, new cars, TV, or getting solar panels installed) is 21st-century. Anything involving the overwhelmed government or public utilities (enforcing dumping laws, licensing dogs, hooking up solar panel meters to the grid, observing common traffic courtesies) is early 20th-century.
In California, civilization is speeding in reverse—well aside from the decrepit infrastructure, dismal public schools, and sky-high home prices. Or rather, the state travels halfway in reverse: anything involving the private sector (smartphones, Internet, new cars, TV, or getting solar panels installed) is 21st-century. Anything involving the overwhelmed government or public utilities (enforcing dumping laws, licensing dogs, hooking up solar panel meters to the grid, observing common traffic courtesies) is early 20th-century.
Why is this
so, and how do Californians adjust?
They accept
a few unspoken rules of state behavior and then use their
resources to navigate around them.
1) Law
enforcement in California hinges on ignoring felonies to focus on misdemeanors
and infractions. Or rather, if a Californian is deemed to be law-abiding, a
legal resident, and with some means, the regulatory state will audit, inspect,
and likely fine his property and behavior in hopes of raising revenue. That is
a safe means of compensating for the reality that millions, some potentially
dangerous, are not following the law, and can only be forced to comply at great
cost and in a fashion that will seem politically incorrect.
The
practical result of a schizophrenic postmodern regulatory and premodern
frontier state? Throw out onto the road three sacks of garbage with your
incriminating power bill in them, or dump the cooking oil of your easily
identifiable mobile canteen on the side of the road, and there are no green
consequences. Install a leach line that ends up one foot too close to a water
well, and expect thousands of dollars of fines or compliance costs.
2) Elite
progressive virtue-signaling is in direct proportion to elite apartheid: the
more one champions green statutes, the plight of illegal aliens, the need for
sanctuary cities, or the evils of charter schools, so all the more the
megaphone is relieved that housing prices are high and thus exclusionary to
“them.”
The more
likely one associates with the privileged, so too the more one avoids those who
seem to be impoverished or residing illegally, and the more one is likely to
put his children in expensive and prestigious private academies. One’s loud
ideology serves as a psychosocial means of squaring the circle of living in
direct antithesis to one’s professions. (I do not know how the new federal tax
law will affect California’s liberal pieties, given the elite will see their
now non-deductible state taxes effectively double.)
3) California
is no longer really a single state. Few in the Bay Area have ever been to the
southern Sierra Nevada foothill communities, or the west side of the Central
Valley, or the upper quarter of the state. Coastal California is simply far
more left-wing than other blue states; interior California is far more
right-wing than most red states; increasingly, the former dictate to and rule
the latter.
The sharp
divide between Massachusetts and Mississippi requires 1,500 miles; in
California, the similar cultural distance is about 130 miles from Menlo Park to
Mendota. Add California’s neo-Confederate ideasinto
the equation—such as nullification and sanctuary cities—and we seem on the
verge of some sort of secession. (Would the Central Valley follow the path of
West Virginia, split off, and remain in the Union?)
4) The
postmodern 21st-century state media in its various manifestations is committed
to social justice, not necessarily to disinterested reporting. Few read about environmental lawsuits over
the planned pathway of a disruptive high-speed rail project; not so in the case
of planned state nullification of
offshore drilling.
In many
news accounts, the race and ethnicity of a violent criminal are deduced in the
cynical (and often quite illiberal) reader comments that follow. Is the
newspaper deliberately suppressing news information to incite readership, who,
in turn, through their commentaries flesh out the news that is not reported and
simultaneously spike online viewership by their lurid outrage?
Folk wisdom
in California translates into something along the following lines: an
unidentified “suspect” in a drunk driving accident that leaves two dead on the
side of the road can for some time remains unidentified; a local accountant of
the wrong profile who is indicted by the IRS has his name and picture blared.
Progressive
Winners and Losers
There are progressive exceptions: universities—in email blast warnings to students and faculty about mere suspects seen on campus in connection with reported burglaries or sexual assaults—are not shy in providing physical characteristics, dress, and perceived racial identities. The media, in other words, feels by massaging its coverage of California realities, it can serve an invaluable role in guiding us to our fated progressive futures—with exceptions for income and class.
There are progressive exceptions: universities—in email blast warnings to students and faculty about mere suspects seen on campus in connection with reported burglaries or sexual assaults—are not shy in providing physical characteristics, dress, and perceived racial identities. The media, in other words, feels by massaging its coverage of California realities, it can serve an invaluable role in guiding us to our fated progressive futures—with exceptions for income and class.
Californians,
both the losers and beneficiaries of these unspoken rules, have lost confidence
in the equal application of the law and indeed the idea of transparent and
meritocratic government.
Cynicism is
rampant. Law-abiding Californians do whatever is necessary not to come to the
attention of any authorities, whose desperate need for both revenue and
perceived social justice (150,000 households in a state of 40 million residents
pay about 50 percent of California income tax revenue) is carnivorous.
A cynical
neighbor once summed up the counter-intuitive rules to me: if you are in a car
collision, hope that you are hit by, rather than hit an illegal alien. If
someone breaks into your home and you are forced to use a firearm, hope that
you are wounded nonlethally in the exchange, at least more severely than is the
intruder. And if you are cited by an agency, hope it is for growing an acre of
marijuana rather than having a two-foot puddle on your farm classified as an
inland waterway.
I could add
a fourth: it is always legally safer to allow your dog to be devoured by a stray
pit-bull than to shoot the pit-bull to save your dog.
In the
former case, neither the owner nor the state ever appears; in the latter both
sometimes do.
In a state
where millions cannot be held accountable, those who can will be—both to
justify a regulatory octopus, and as social justice for their innate
unwarranted privilege.
Content created by the Center for
American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news
publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities
for our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com.
About the Author: Victor Davis
Hanson
Victor Davis Hanson is an American
military historian, columnist, former classics professor, and scholar of
ancient warfare. He was a professor of classics at California State University,
Fresno, and is currently the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at
Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He has been a visiting professor at
Hillsdale College since 2004. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal
in 2007 by President George W. Bush. Hanson is also a farmer (growing raisin
grapes on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends
related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author most recently of The Second
World Wars – How the First Global Conflict was Fought and Won (Basic
Books).