That’s because of statistics. Dirty math getting in the way. It also helps if you break a group into “those that follow a religion” and “those that bastardize a religion for their own cause.” In that scenario, banning the first group doesn’t seem to help in stopping the 2nd group.
I’m not sure how to answer this since you didn’t have to be white to immigrate to the US prior to 1965.
Why don’t you talk to the coworker I have 12 feet away from me who’s grandma immigrated from South Korea in the 50s and laughed at you as she read this over my shoulder and get back to me.
This is complete lunacy. Having a quota system that favors “white immigration” because it favors European immigration =/= having to be white to immigrate to America. It’s just non-sense.
Then how are people referring to a muslim ban as totalitarian or a “slippery slope” when banning people from immigrating to the country didn’t lead to these things in the past?
How are they referring to a move towards control as totalitarian (when the definition is full/near full control)? Because any increase in govt control is a move towards totalitarian govt? Not sure how you need clarity on that. Do you also think that a move towards socialized healthcare ISN’T a move towards a more socialized society?
You also have a much different opinion of “worked just fine” than most people, so keep that in mind.
This question cannot be answered, because there was never a point in time where the US would only accept white immigrants.
There have indeed been periods of restriction on immigration from different regions; there was never a time when the U.S. “only accepted white immigrants.”
All those Chinese immigrants during the days of the CA gold rush would beg to differ here. I love how you continue to quote laws and ignore what ACTUALLY HAPPENED.