On the origins of Hart-Celler, looking into the 1952 report Whom Shall We Welcome, which Truman requested from the Congressional Immigration and Naturalization Commission, the McCarran-Walter immigration Act (aka Immigration and Nationalization Act of 1952) loosened a few restrictions on the Johnson-Reed Act of 1924, but largely upheld the national quotas, so a few said it went too far and more said it didn't go far enough to bring in various global garbage, and was therefore a relic of "Nordic supremacism."
The pdf for the 1952 report is here: https://archive.org/stream/whomweshallw ... 5/mode/2up
It's relevant because it primed the later Hart-Celler Act, after a bit more chipping away at the walls by Javits and Celler (both of whom testified to this commission, of course), the ADL ghost-writing JFK's book A Nation of Immigrants so they wouldn't raise dat wicked anti-semite father of his as an election issue, etc.
Here's an unsightly collection of some relevant info from the 300+ pages.
(Notice Saul Alinsky in there? Unbelievable.)
Those 1921 numbers of 356,952 European immigrants and less than a thousand non-White immigrants are worthy of rubbing one out.
Naturally, the commission's executive director was Harry Rosenfeld, and its chairman was Phillip Perlman.
The report starts off with a bunch of religious fluff about equality of mankind, specious quotations from Jefferson's intentionally misunderstood "all men created equal" line in the Declaration, lots of mumbo jumbo about how da Nazis and now da Soviet Union (whom half the people here had just fled after having successfully destroyed Germany from without, Russia from within, and having pushed an unwitting Truman into recognizing Israel) are totalitarians (a la Hanna Arendt), so we should stop antagonizing other peoples and stop clinging to outdated and "irrelevant" racism and open the floodgates. This, combined with things like The Authoritarian Personality, are evidence of this new turn against the "totalitarianism" which the Jews had wittingly (Soviet Union) and unwittingly (Germany) created through their own actions, is the beginning of the turn toward a "New Left" wherein they find that capitalism and "freedom" were even more potentially subversive than Communism, particularly after Stalin started to look at Jews and Khrushchev embarrassed the Old Left with his "On the Cult of Personality" speech. The 50's are only conservative and "normal" from an outside view, as one can find all the roots of Jewish subversion that would explode in the 60's already growing and forming connections in the 50's.
One of the selling points is talking about people like Igor Sikorsky, Alexander Graham Bell, Enrico Fermi etc. as proof that mo immigrants means mo science and progress. Curiously, Einstein is also noted as being an example of "German" immigration gone right. Jews had, of course, been sneaking in under the national quota system at disproportionate rates as "Brits" and "Germans" and "Dutchmen" since "religion" doesn't affect nationality, goy.
Of course, Truman had already cucked on DP's (displaced persons) in 1948 and 1950, and the arguments for "special quotas" for certain groups included groups who had been "expelled" (Jews), and people living in "high population density areas" (Jews, intentionally). The people who have been kicked out for their loathsome actions therefore get SPECIAL license to come to your country in extra numbers, across nationalities, to perpetrate the same actions, funded by their latent tribesmen with moneys acquired by the most nefarious of means.
One of the worst arguments is that countries like France don't like us because we don't take in enough (non-French) negroids and other assorted garbage. They were just as useless in the Cold War and snobbish after the Hart-Celler Act, of course, wherein De Gaulle shipped all of their gold out of the U.S. in a big middle finger move shortly thereafter.
Snuck in after all the religious equality fluff and universal rights pablum are a few notes that the commission had also spoken to "business leaders," which of course meant the same sorts of agribusiness chumps who presently accept government subsidies for their billion-dollar, illegal alien-employing businesses.
This combination of women, businessmen, clergy, and academicians dominates the actual Jews who were present and invited to speak, but it was obviously carefully chosen to select the most cucked, spineless, and treacherous elements opposing the White male republic which this nation was actually founded as. It gave perfect cover to the numerically smaller but narratively dominant Jews therein.
Among the most insidious of the arguments are that we got things like brilliant inventors and scientists from the immigrant population, so if we just remember that this helped us,
then we can surely be helped by bringing in lots of this, because there is NO difference, folks!
By the way, it's worth noting that the 1921, 1924, and 1965 Immigration Acts did not deal with the Western Hemisphere, so the actual majority of recent spic arrivals from 1965-present can't even be blamed on the 65 Act, it's simply our government refusing to enforce its own laws, because people who stand to benefit provide the talking points for worthless faggots such as these to regurgitate more "universal values, love and freedom, (and the bottom line of my donors)!" rhetoric.
The report notes that there are large populations of angry negroids in the West Indies who demand entry....so therefore we should be accepting angry blacks from places like Haiti, who have a chip on their shoulder toward us....
One thing not discussed, of course, is that all these "labor needs" bring an underclass population, who are immediately met with Jews over here riling them up in the name of "equality," so they end up giving you two minutes of work and 52 years of La Raza and "reconquista" rhetoric. I do not think that people arguing that we need an underclass, then agitating that underclass to push for "equality" when it gets here, did not plan their actions in advance.
