0 comment Thursday, September 11, 2014 | admin
Hmongs want respect for role in Vietnam
Several Democrat lawmakers are reintroducing the Hmong Migration Education Act. Principle author Donna Seidel (D-Wausau) says she wants Wisconsin school districts to be required to teach our kids about how and why the Hmong population came here. She hopes to create an environment in our state of mutual respect and tolerance. "Our hope is that this legislation will create a better understanding of the Hmong's heroic role and enormous sacrifice in support of America's military during the Vietnam Era."
ChaSong Yang, Executive Director of the Sheboygan Hmong Mutual Association, says Hmong children in the US often question their parents about whether the Hmong really helped the US government during the Vietnam War, because it's not mentioned in the US History books.''
For those who don't remember this incident from a few years ago, this indicates some of the problems between Hmong and the majority local population:
Hmong Hunter Charged With 6 Murders Is Said to be a Shaman
Before the crime above happened, Joe Guzzardi at VDare wrote this piece, and James Fulford wrote this piece, after the killings:
'From our ''We Told You So'' Department -- A Hmong Hmedley
And here is Roy Beck's thorough explication of what happened with the growth of the Hmong settlement in Wisconsin.
It's worth reading; the situation in Wausau since the arrival of the immigrants/refugees is a microcosm of what is happening across America, with one town, formerly homogeneous, being overwhelmed by immigrants from a drastically different, essentially stone-age culture. There have been gang problems, the inevitable strain on social services, and the divisions among the locals that the presence of the immigrant 'community' brought.
And then recently, a Hmong was killed, further complicating the tensions.
I encounter so many Americans who are caught up in the romanticized American vision of immigration as portrayed in gauzy Hollywood images and the sentimentally rosy pictures of some history books. Today's immigrants, it can't be said often enough, are not the equivalent of the immigrants of the old days, so glowingly represented in our collective memory.
There are a lot of Vietnam vets who cling to their own sentimental ideas that we must, that is MUST provide a refuge and a home for the Hmong 'because they helped us out in Nam'. If they did help us, and I am assuming they actually did, they did so because it was in their own self-interest. They merely joined forces with us against their hereditary enemies. An analogy would be the American Indian tribes who sometimes made alliances with the white settlers and colonists against enemy tribes, or against other whites. They did not do so because they loved us but for reasons of their own, for the most part, because it suited their purposes, it was expedient for them to help us.
And if it's necessary to give the Hmong a perpetual place at our table, then we must bring all our allies or helpers from the troubled Middle East, also, to America, and probably drop them down in some nice quiet Midwestern town, if such a place still remains. That is always the way these resettlement programs work; there must be an official government policy to that effect: refugees and exotic immigrant groups are required to be resettled in a quiet, homogeneous small town. Always. Can't have homogeneity; diversity is good, ergo homogeneity is doubleplusungood.
But if the Hmong did help us in Viet Nam, how long does our obligation to them last? Why is America now the designated savior of the entire world? Can we resolve all the age-old conflicts in the world? Are we so problem-free, so wealthy, and so secure in our land that we can now take on the problems of the whole world? Apparently a sizeable portion of our population thinks so, as they are hellbent on our being the servant of humanity, at our own expense.
It looks as though the conflicts the Hmong left behind in Southeast Asia are now being replaced by conflicts in our own country. American citizens are being killed, and life in many of these Midwestern towns will never be the same, all thanks to our do-goodism run amok.
And if we follow this policy of rescuing everybody, we will be seeing a huge increase in immigration from Iraq; we will be compelled to give visas to everybody that has been an ostensible ally or helper to us over there. But what happens when the various factions of Iraqis end up next door to their enemies from back home, as has been happening in Detroit? And what about the possibility of fraud and taqiyya? Can we be sure that potential refugees are who and what they claim to be? Might there not be some terrorists or would-be terrorists among them?
Terrorism is not the only concern, as the stories about the Hmong demanding 'respect' in our history books. Every new ethnic group we introduce to our country becomes another part of an unworkable puzzle, whose pieces don't fit together. They become 'victims' which is all part of post-Civil Rights era America: claim victimhood and discrimination, demand 'respect' and deference, and you win the lottery. And America loses; it's a one-sided deal in which we lose every roll of the dice, because those dice are loaded. We can never do right, only wrong. If there is a difference of opinion, we have to apologize, we have to bend, we have to make concessions and amends. We have to rewrite history to include mea culpas, to make ourselves the sole villains and authors of every injustice. We have to give up pieces of our history and heritage and common memory so as to avoid offending some victim group. When is enough enough?
I am still waiting for the day when not just a lone voice or two, but masses of people stand up and say that the multicultural emperor has no clothes.
Several Democrat lawmakers are reintroducing the Hmong Migration Education Act. Principle author Donna Seidel (D-Wausau) says she wants Wisconsin school districts to be required to teach our kids about how and why the Hmong population came here. She hopes to create an environment in our state of mutual respect and tolerance. "Our hope is that this legislation will create a better understanding of the Hmong's heroic role and enormous sacrifice in support of America's military during the Vietnam Era."
ChaSong Yang, Executive Director of the Sheboygan Hmong Mutual Association, says Hmong children in the US often question their parents about whether the Hmong really helped the US government during the Vietnam War, because it's not mentioned in the US History books.''
For those who don't remember this incident from a few years ago, this indicates some of the problems between Hmong and the majority local population:
Hmong Hunter Charged With 6 Murders Is Said to be a Shaman
Before the crime above happened, Joe Guzzardi at VDare wrote this piece, and James Fulford wrote this piece, after the killings:
'From our ''We Told You So'' Department -- A Hmong Hmedley
And here is Roy Beck's thorough explication of what happened with the growth of the Hmong settlement in Wisconsin.
It's worth reading; the situation in Wausau since the arrival of the immigrants/refugees is a microcosm of what is happening across America, with one town, formerly homogeneous, being overwhelmed by immigrants from a drastically different, essentially stone-age culture. There have been gang problems, the inevitable strain on social services, and the divisions among the locals that the presence of the immigrant 'community' brought.
And then recently, a Hmong was killed, further complicating the tensions.
I encounter so many Americans who are caught up in the romanticized American vision of immigration as portrayed in gauzy Hollywood images and the sentimentally rosy pictures of some history books. Today's immigrants, it can't be said often enough, are not the equivalent of the immigrants of the old days, so glowingly represented in our collective memory.
There are a lot of Vietnam vets who cling to their own sentimental ideas that we must, that is MUST provide a refuge and a home for the Hmong 'because they helped us out in Nam'. If they did help us, and I am assuming they actually did, they did so because it was in their own self-interest. They merely joined forces with us against their hereditary enemies. An analogy would be the American Indian tribes who sometimes made alliances with the white settlers and colonists against enemy tribes, or against other whites. They did not do so because they loved us but for reasons of their own, for the most part, because it suited their purposes, it was expedient for them to help us.
And if it's necessary to give the Hmong a perpetual place at our table, then we must bring all our allies or helpers from the troubled Middle East, also, to America, and probably drop them down in some nice quiet Midwestern town, if such a place still remains. That is always the way these resettlement programs work; there must be an official government policy to that effect: refugees and exotic immigrant groups are required to be resettled in a quiet, homogeneous small town. Always. Can't have homogeneity; diversity is good, ergo homogeneity is doubleplusungood.
But if the Hmong did help us in Viet Nam, how long does our obligation to them last? Why is America now the designated savior of the entire world? Can we resolve all the age-old conflicts in the world? Are we so problem-free, so wealthy, and so secure in our land that we can now take on the problems of the whole world? Apparently a sizeable portion of our population thinks so, as they are hellbent on our being the servant of humanity, at our own expense.
It looks as though the conflicts the Hmong left behind in Southeast Asia are now being replaced by conflicts in our own country. American citizens are being killed, and life in many of these Midwestern towns will never be the same, all thanks to our do-goodism run amok.
And if we follow this policy of rescuing everybody, we will be seeing a huge increase in immigration from Iraq; we will be compelled to give visas to everybody that has been an ostensible ally or helper to us over there. But what happens when the various factions of Iraqis end up next door to their enemies from back home, as has been happening in Detroit? And what about the possibility of fraud and taqiyya? Can we be sure that potential refugees are who and what they claim to be? Might there not be some terrorists or would-be terrorists among them?
Terrorism is not the only concern, as the stories about the Hmong demanding 'respect' in our history books. Every new ethnic group we introduce to our country becomes another part of an unworkable puzzle, whose pieces don't fit together. They become 'victims' which is all part of post-Civil Rights era America: claim victimhood and discrimination, demand 'respect' and deference, and you win the lottery. And America loses; it's a one-sided deal in which we lose every roll of the dice, because those dice are loaded. We can never do right, only wrong. If there is a difference of opinion, we have to apologize, we have to bend, we have to make concessions and amends. We have to rewrite history to include mea culpas, to make ourselves the sole villains and authors of every injustice. We have to give up pieces of our history and heritage and common memory so as to avoid offending some victim group. When is enough enough?
I am still waiting for the day when not just a lone voice or two, but masses of people stand up and say that the multicultural emperor has no clothes.
Labels: Diversity, Education, Immigration, Multiculturalism