Image Credit: Gary Hershorn/Getty Images 
The year 2025 is the 60th anniversary of a key piece of legislation which drastically altered the direction of this country and its demographic makeup.
Is change in the wind? Does 2025 signal a new era which may reverse the policies that governed our immigration strategy for the past six decades?
The legislation I refer to is the Hart-Celler Act, passed by Congress in 1965 and signed by President Lyndon Johnson.
Why is Hart-Celler so critical?
First, let’s review the history of American immigration policy.
Decades of mass immigration propaganda has led people to believe that the U.S.A. has always been a “nation of immigrants.”
Etymologically, “nation of immigrants” is an oxymoron. The word “nation” derives from “birth.” A nation is principally composed of those who share a common birth. So you really can’t have a “nation of immigrants.”
Those who settled Jamestown, Plymouth Rock, Boston, Philadelphia, etc. were not immigrants. They were pioneers. They didn’t come to assimilate to the Indian tribes, but to construct English societies on the North American continent.
A century and a half later, these already-existing societies became a united, independent nation.
Throughout American history, immigrants came in ebbs and flows. A period of high immigration was followed by one with low immigration, giving newcomers time to assimilate and intermarry with the natives.
When people talk about historical immigration to the U.S. they are typically referring to the “Great Wave” period from the 1880s to 1920s. Shiploads of European immigrants would sail into New York Harbor by the Statue of Liberty, which was actually built to portray “Liberty Enlightening the World” — not “America as Doormat of the World.”
There were many problems in the Great Wave period, but at least the America of that time demanded assimilation.
Subsequently, President Calvin Coolidge and Congress drastically cut immigration.
For the reduced number of immigrants that continued to come into the country, a national quota system was set up based on the existing ethnic makeup of the United States.
During this era, which lasted from the 1920s to 1960s, there was actually net out-migration, with more people leaving the U.S. than entering. Americans survived the Great Depression and World War II and emerged victorious.
The post-war period was one of great prosperity and American confidence. In many ways, it was a high point in U.S. history.
Then along came the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, also known as Hart-Celler. We were assured that the new law would neither usher in a million immigrants every year nor change the ethnic balance of the country. Both of those promises were false, of course.
Hart-Celler scrapped the quota system and replaced it with family reunification. But think about it: if foreign families really want to stay together, they could just remain in the old country.
What Hart-Celler really did was set up nepotism as the basis of U.S. immigration policy. That’s how extended families and entire villages from the Third World were imported to the U.S.
As a result, the demographics of our country have changed and the politics have moved leftward.
Jobs, crime, culture, religion, economy — all of them are affected by the mass importation of the Third World to the United States.
But that may now be changing.
Since Donald Trump took office in January of 2025, illegal entries at the southern border have been mostly shut down. They said it couldn’t be done, but Trump did it.
Not only that, but Trump has caused 2 million foreigners to leave the U.S. this year.
Now, the President is talking about shutting down legal immigration from the Third World.
Trump’s recent “Somali Rant,” though presented in a crude manner, brings into public discourse the reality that not all immigrant groups are equally compatible with the historical American nation.
There is also a birthright citizenship case pending in the Supreme Court. That could make a big difference.
To paraphrase the words of Bob Dylan, the times may be a-changin’.
Chinese-Style Net Censorship for the Post-Human Technocracy
