The Rapidly-Growing Fifth Column
If you value articles like this, sign up for our daily email newsletter and support us with a donation.
Editor's note:
Election Day is Nov. 5. Be ready for the ballot box by registering to vote.
For information on registration deadlines in your state or territory, click here.
To register to vote online, or update your registration, click here.
America as a "nation of immigrants," Pat Buchanan writes, "is among our most beautiful myths. It appeals to the heart. And there is truth to it. Many of us can trace bloodlines back to ancestors who came over in the 17th, 18th, 19th or 20th centuries. But save for the 36 million here now, we are not "a nation of immigrants." Rarely have immigrants constituted 10% of our number."
There is a lot to say on the topic of immigration. Three generations of Americans have grown up believing the "melting pot," and the mass immigration that creates the need for it are as American as baseball and apple pie. However, if one looks at the big picture, projections over the next few decades and certainly the next century, they would have to ask exactly what the ever increasing number of immigrants should assimilate to and how much longer America will remain American at this rate?
As time has passed and diasporas of new foreign citizens have grown, locals are increasingly required to adapt to foreign cultures rather than the other way around.
State flags that have flown for more than a hundred years are now being replaced with less "offensive" versions, often against the wishes of locals.
Students from the fastest-growing demographic in the United States now regularly wave the flag of the nation they truly consider their own, and often replace the flag of the United States with that of the foreign nation they seem to prefer.
Even the Republican National Convention, rather than acting as a unifying force, teaching newcomers who care about the US what it means to be American, instead broadcast the culture and faith of foreign rivals. Today it seems America is an inverted melting pot – assimilating to foreign cultures rather than requiring it of them.
This problem is perfectly outlined in a 2007 paper by Anupam Chander, for the Fordham Law Review. In May of 2006, Cardinal Roger Mahony, while addressing a pro-immigration rally in California, told attendees they should leave their Mexican flags at home and instead fly American flags. Chander, himself at most a second generation immigrant from India, argues in his paper that expecting immigrants to fly the American flag "diminishes them" as humans and shows what he in pejorative tone calls an "assimilationist ethic, establishing one proper mode of being American."
According to Chander, Americans are wrong to expect others to assimilate. Yet we are told that mass immigration, by millions of new arrivals being given this very message (assimilation is a betrayal of your true self), will have no effect (or an only good effect) on the future of the nation.
While the United States boasts unparalleled military power, as discussed in part one of this series, old adversaries and new rivals have adapted new strategies to undermine that power. Immigration is currently being used to embed foreign influences into the political, social and cultural fabric of the nation, in order to weaken it from within.
MIGRATION AS A STRATEGIC WEAPON: THE CONCEPT OF 'WEAPONS OF MASS IMMIGRATION'
Migration is not just a sociological phenomenon; it has long been a strategic tool to gain leverage over foreign nations. In her book Weapons of Mass Migration, Kelly Greenhill outlines how states and groups manipulate migration flows to destabilize rivals or extract political concessions.
Historical examples include the Roman Empire's struggles with migrating barbarian tribes. As Buchanan once wrote, "In 376 a large band of Gothic refugees arrived at the Empire's Danube frontier, asking for asylum. In a complete break with established Roman policy, they were allowed in, unsubdued. They revolted, and within two years had defeated and killed the emperor Valens – the one who had received them – along with two-thirds of his army, at the battle of Hadrianople."
More recently, the Soviet Union used "strategic population transfers" to maintain control over Eastern Europe. Chinese influence in Canada is yet another perfect example of a current situation in which mass migration has been used to infiltrate and undermine the sovereignty of a nation.
MIGRATION AS A WEAPON
The use of migration as a weapon reflects the competitive nature of international relations, a concept central to the realist theory. As John Mearsheimer explains in The Great Delusion, "Nations generally prioritize their own people and as can be seen taking place in every nation where mass immigration has been the norm, people-groups are also generally self-interested and prefer, protect, and privilege their own above others, especially when they are in a minority as migrants are."
Mearsheimer points out that human beings are not just individuals, but also social beings. When people are brought into this world, they are socialized into particular groups. Mearsheimer, himself a liberal, argues that our liberal worldview underestimates the power that particular groups have on creating group loyalty.
He argues that a nation has six features which are: a sense of oneness, a distinct culture, a sense of superiority, a deep history, sacred territory, and sovereignty. These six features distinguish a particular group of people from another and do not change, certainly not drastically, within a few generations. In fact, in Europe, the United States, and much of the West, it is often the second generation migrants who have the greatest allegiance to their former homeland and culture.
DIASPORA GROWTH AND POLITICAL INFLUENCE: INSIGHTS FROM EXODUS
Paul Collier's research in Exodus further elucidates the dangers posed by expanding diasporas. When migrant communities grow, they attract more newcomers, as existing cultural networks reduce the barriers to integration. As these communities become entrenched, the host population must adapt to the migrants' culture, rather than the other way around.
In this process, diasporas often become politically active, lobbying to promote their interests and reshape policies in ways that reflect their original homeland (look no further than Hindu statues in Brampton, Canada and Sugar Land, Texas). Over time, this dynamic can transform a host nation into a replica of the migrants' country of origin.
The pattern holds true regardless of the origin of the diaspora. In Sweden, Somali immigrants have created enclaves which have recreated Somalia in formerly peaceful Sweden. Similarly, Canada is now grappling with the consequences of an influx of Indian migrants who actively promote their cultural and political agendas.
As Collier notes, when the newcomers' loyalties lie with their ethnic community or homeland, rather than the host nation, they become not just immigrants but colonists –changing the culture and political priorities of their new home.
This is especially concerning when many of the new arrivals come from rival or growing powers. Immigration from smaller nations poses manageable challenges; the arrival of people from geopolitical rivals presents significant risks. India, for example, is one of the nations of origin for the majority of all immigrants to the West.
However, a large portion of recent arrivals view immigration as a form of retribution against former colonial powers, a chance to exploit the West and assert their cultural dominance. If you find your way over to Indian-American X (formerly known as Twitter,) you will find very strong nationalist sentiment. It doesn't take long to scratch the thin veneer of multiculturalism, however, to uncover a deep seated resentment toward the very West in which they now live, vote, and hold increasingly prominent positions.
A striking example is Harmeet Dhillon, a Republican leader who used her platform not to encourage Indian-Americans to embrace American values, but to promote Indian cultural practices.
In a personal anecdote, I had a friend who was American of Indian origin whose parents had migrated to the US. She went to a prestigious university, held an extremely well-paid job with her state government, hobnobbed with congressmen, senators, and Republican club members. On the outside, like Dhillon, she claimed to be a dedicated American patriot. But over time, she let more and more of her true feelings slip. She vehemently hated the British and rejoiced openly seeing mass immigration tear apart that once great nation. She hated all things British related to the US, as well. And if ever push came to shove, she, like the Hindu nationalists on X, would always put India, Hinduism and Indians above America or Americans.
Of course, to Mearshimer's point, this is completely normal. There is nothing wrong with loving one's country and people. But, for the United States to remain successful, it must ensure that those it allows to come in, vote and run the nation have that same love and passion for this nation alone.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND DEI PROGRAMS: FAST-TRACKING FOREIGN INFLUENCE
The risks of mass immigration extend beyond demographic shifts, particularly when foreign-born individuals with divided loyalties ascend to positions of influence within the US government, military and key industries.
Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs, along with affirmative action policies, are sold to the public as ways to to promote inclusivity. However, they can also fast-track individuals from rival nations into sensitive roles, inadvertently creating opportunities for espionage and subversion.
Recent cases highlight these risks.
Yanqing Ye, a Chinese military officer, used her position as a student at Boston University to gather intelligence and conduct assignments for the People's Liberation Army (PLA). She maintained close contact with her PLA supervisors while accessing US military websites and sending information to China.
Similarly, Jinchao "Patrick" Wei, a U.S. Navy sailor stationed on the USS Essex, passed sensitive military information to Chinese intelligence. Wei used encrypted communication and shared technical manuals and operational details of naval exercises. These breaches illustrate how individuals placed in trusted roles can compromise national security for the benefit of foreign governments.
These examples are not isolated cases – they reflect a broader challenge posed by policies that prioritize demographic representation over rigorous vetting. As more individuals with divided loyalties gain influence, including holding the positions that conduct vetting, or in the case of DEI officials – positions in which they can accuse anyone attempting to vet candidates of any number of character-destroying accusations – they may push the interests of their ethnic groups or home nations above those of the American public.
Without proper safeguards, even the most secure institutions will be infiltrated. This creates the risk that key national defense structures could ultimately serve foreign interests, compromising the very foundations of US security. What happens when the person giving the orders is on the other team?
CONCLUSION: THE NEED FOR RESPONSIBLE IMMIGRATION POLICY
The growing influence of foreign-born communities and the use of DEI programs to fast-track individuals into positions of power present serious risks to national security. If the United States fails to address these issues, it risks fragmenting from within, as foreign interests take root in critical institutions.
The lessons from history are clear: immigration must be carefully managed to protect the cultural and political integrity of the nation. As George Washington warned in his Farewell Address, entangling alliances – whether through political agreements or unchecked immigration – can compromise a nation's independence and sovereignty.
Immigration should be treated not as a universal right, but as a privilege reserved for those who demonstrate an impassioned commitment to America: her people, her faith, her culture, and her future.
In the coming articles of The New American Crisis series, we will continue to explore these issues in greater depth, examining how they are intertwined and why they must be resolved to preserve the nation's survival. The battle for America's future is not on foreign soil – it is here, at home.
Arthur is a former editor and consultant. Born in India to missionary parents, he spent his early career working in development for NGOs in Asia, Central America, and Africa.
Arthur has an educational background in history and psychology, with certifications from the University of Oxford and Leiden in the economics, politics, and ethics of mass migration and comparative theories in terrorism and counterterrorism. He is currently launching CivWest, a company focused on building capital to fund restorative projects and create resilient systems across the Western world.