Paleoconservatives have alreadyÂ achieved much success with the immigration issue. Peter Brimelow’s seminal articles and book paved the way for a larger awareness, concern, and outrage, where paleoconservatives were eventually able to push the immigration debate from the margins into the mainstream.
IfÂ we paleoconservatives could accomplish another noble deed, it would be to make ‘subsidiarity‘ a household word – well, that may be asking much, especially in today’s world of pop culture and third-world immigration, but at least it could be a household word in respectable homes.
What is subsidiarity? It is “the principle which states that matters ought to be handled by the smallest (or, the lowest) competent authority.” It has its origins in pre-Vatican II Catholic teaching, and in ancient European thought, making it appealing to Protestants as well.
In other words, if a state can handle something, why should the federal government be involved at all? And if a local community can handle something, why should the state be involved? And if a family can handle something, why should the community be involved?
The perfect example is education, in which the federal government has no business. The Department of Education should be closed down, and all educational matters should be returned to states, local communities and families. Another example is the judicial tyranny in our federal courts. Local and state judges should have primary jurisdiction over most ofÂ the nonsense in ourÂ federal courts – not to mention the fact that many of these issues could be handled by state legislators or city councils.
What was once a staple of conservative thought, however, is today under attack. Recently I’ve heard both leftists and neocons like Bill O’Reilly saying that local authorities have no business in enforcing immigration laws. O’Reilly will set up a sanctuary city as a strawman, and then conclude that any local involvement in immigration is wrong.
In the broader sense there is a national interest in enforcing immigration laws, reducing quotas from the Third World, and especially in securing the border. But on a very basic level, most real enforcement will and should be done by local authorities. They are the ones who know their communities and can arrest and begin deportation proceedings of third-world invaders.