Vivek Ramaswamy exposes ‘right fragility’ with culture truth bomb
If Vivek Ramaswamy continues discussing immigration on X, some of his former supporters might urge the incoming Trump administration to assign him to manage the White House 7-Eleven, a scenario humorously predicted by the Babylon Bee earlier this year.
The biotech entrepreneur sparked a firestorm with a lengthy post about immigration and the economy. In his opening paragraph, he wrote:
The reason top tech companies often hire foreign-born and first-generation engineers over "native" Americans isn’t because of an innate American IQ deficit (a lazy and wrong explanation). A key part of it comes down to the c-word: culture.
The former GOP presidential candidate and Trump surrogate argued that American culture has emphasized mediocrity over excellence long before young people reach college. His comments drew sharp criticism from conservatives who support stricter limits on both illegal and legal immigration. Critics argued that institutions should prioritize American workers, address skills gaps, and avoid outsourcing high-paying jobs to other countries.
I believe every country’s policies should prioritize its citizens over foreign nationals. I understand the frustration felt by STEM graduates who struggle to find jobs in their fields, especially when they see companies hiring workers from India, China, and other parts of Asia. But strong leaders must prioritize hard truths over convenient lies.
Unfortunately, too many conservatives default to 'right fragility' whenever the culture police come knocking.
Anyone who has criticized participation trophy culture in youth sports, grade inflation in high schools, or emotionally fragile college students knows there is some truth in Ramaswamy’s argument. His point about how social norms influence social outcomes deserves discussion, not dismissal.
Unfortunately, many conservatives reacted emotionally, interpreting his comments as a claim that Asians — specifically Indians — are superior to Americans — specifically white people. This simple observation about cultural norms inadvertently exposed the “right fragility” increasingly evident among conservative social commentators.
I found the reactions to Vivek’s comments fascinating because white conservatives often invoke “culture” to explain why black Americans struggle to gain admission to elite universities or remain underrepresented in the tech industry. They cite factors such as family structure, study habits, media consumption, values, priorities, drive, and grit as alternatives to the progressive explanation of systemic racism. Some so-called racial realists take it further, claiming that low IQs account for the educational and economic disparities between black and white Americans.
Vivek’s remarks, however, revealed a closely guarded political secret: The socioeconomic gaps between Asians and whites are as significant as those between whites and blacks. For instance, the difference in SAT math scores between Asian students (626) and white students (532) exceeds the gap between white and black students (441). Similar disparities exist in the average number of hours high school students spend on homework and the percentage who complete it five or more days a week.
Even smaller achievement gaps can significantly affect outcomes. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, 64% of Asian eighth-grade students are proficient in math, compared to 44% of white students. A similar disparity exists in reading proficiency. Conservatives often cite family stability as a factor contributing to the “achievement gap” between black and white students. While Ramaswamy didn’t address these factors in his cultural analysis, he easily could have. Asian-Americans have higher marriage rates and lower divorce rates, and they are far less likely to have children out of wedlock.
Discussing culture, rather than genetics, is valuable because a society’s norms, values, and priorities can change over time. No country or ethnic group has a monopoly on hard work, determination, or innovation. The dominance of students of Indian descent in the Scripps National Spelling Bee has little to do with the H-1B visa program. In many cases, these children likely speak English as a second — or even third — language at home.
Excelling in math and science at the highest levels requires tremendous discipline and dedication, much like the commitment needed to become an elite athlete. The makeup of the robotics club and basketball team at the University of North Carolina reflects the students who are willing to put in the hard work necessary to compete at the highest levels in their respective fields. Complaints about discrimination will not change that reality.
Educator Jawanza Kunjufu once appealed to young black men by saying, “That that you do most will be that that you do best.” His call to foster a culture of excellence in the classroom should resonate with conservatives who acknowledge the challenges in the K-12 education system and seek to improve economic opportunities for American citizens. Unfortunately, too many conservatives default to “right fragility” whenever the culture police come knocking.
America last? Foreign workers fill jobs while Americans are left out
America is full. Beyond the ongoing waves of illegal immigration, the country has admitted 36 million legal immigrants since 1989 (68 million since 1965), bringing the foreign-born population to a record 51.6 million. Every year, the U.S. issues 1.1 million green cards, 1 million guest worker visas, and 1.1 million foreign student visas. This level of immigration has transformed the nation over the past generation in unprecedented ways.
The real debate should focus on how much immigration we can curtail. Unfortunately, influential forces connected to Trump donors and transition team leaders are pushing to expand the foreign-worker pool, even though America already has more than enough.
Eight years into the MAGA movement, conservatives should not have to play defense to prevent further increases in immigration after four years of Biden’s disastrous policies.
Calls for more foreign workers come from multiple sources, including Elon Musk, who advocates for increasing foreign-worker visas and green cards. The “tech bros” even persuaded Trump to echo Mitt Romney’s half-baked suggestion of “stapling green cards to the diplomas” of foreign students.
We don’t need more foreign workers
After the election, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) emphatically declared, “We need more work visas,” as though it were an unassailable truth. However, the idea of a foreign-worker shortage exists only among those who believe new jobs should be reserved for foreigners while sidelining Americans.
In reality, all net job growth in the U.S. since 2019 has gone to foreign-born workers. Heritage Foundation economist E.J. Antoni notes that, over the past year, native-born workers have lost 773,000 jobs on net, while foreign-born workers have gained more than one million jobs.
Since before the pandemic, the foreign-born workforce has grown by 3.7 million, while the native-born workforce has shrunk by 873,000. These numbers challenge the narrative that America needs more foreign labor.
What began as an argument that Americans won’t do manual labor has evolved into a claim that Americans won’t work in accounting, engineering, computers, or nursing. This belief creates self-fulfilling momentum, working against Americans in numerous industries. As more industries become saturated with workers from India or other countries accustomed to lower wages, salaries are depressed, and Americans are increasingly sidelined — especially as government policies often pay them not to work.
Indian contract companies like Infosys, HCL, Wipro, Cognizant, and Tata have exploited the H-1B, L-1, F-1, and Optional Practical Training visa pipelines to flood Silicon Valley and American tech companies with cheap labor. This approach not only boxes out American workers but also treats many Indian recruits as indentured servants. Over the past few decades, 71% of jobs in Silicon Valley have gone to foreign workers, while 74% of American STEM graduates have failed to secure jobs in STEM fields.
As industries like tech and computers become increasingly saturated with Indian workers, they develop cultures of parochialism and discrimination against Americans. In October, a federal jury found Cognizant, the largest recipient of H-1B visas for many years, guilty of discriminating against American IT workers. During the California-based discrimination lawsuit in Palmer v. Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., evidence revealed that tech firms were actively terminating American employees to replace them with H-1B workers, primarily from India.
The population of Indian nationals in the United States has grown 13-fold since 1980. Every year, Indian nationals consistently rank as the second-largest recipients of green cards, with more than 100,000 issued annually. Additionally, there are 330,000 foreign students from India studying in the U.S. On what planet do GOP donors believe we don’t already have enough?
Toward a more balanced approach
The goal of economic policy — including tax, regulatory, welfare, and immigration measures — should focus on bringing sidelined American workers back into the labor force. Yet, one of the primary arguments for admitting so many immigrants is the supposed lack of available workers. This narrative ignores the significant rise in working-age Americans (16 to 64) not participating in the labor force. These individuals are not counted as unemployed because they are no longer actively seeking work.
The combination of welfare incentives and immigration-driven wage suppression has discouraged an entire generation of workers from rejoining the labor force. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, “If the same share of U.S.-born men (16 to 64) were in the labor force in 2023 as in 1960, there would be 9.5 million more U.S.-born men in the labor force. Even if the share returned to the 2000 level, it would still add 4.8 million men to the labor force.”
Instead of flooding the market with more cheap labor, further discouraging these sidelined workers, policymakers should consider a more balanced approach. Combining immigration reform with welfare reform could help incentivize Americans to re-enter the workforce and reverse these damaging trends.
We constantly hear about the supposed shortage of STEM workers, but labor scholar Steve Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies raises an important question: “If employers are desperate for more STEM workers, why have they been lowering the compensation offered?” According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, compensation for STEM workers in 2023 was actually 7.1% lower than in 2019. If there is a tight labor market, it’s not for Americans but for the growing segment of third-world imports willing to work for less.
Congress banned contract labor immigration in 1891 for good reason. Sections 3 and 4 of the Immigration Act of 1891 prohibited companies and travel agencies from marketing or soliciting immigration with the promise of employment. The Founders envisioned a system that attracted productive immigrants who would assimilate into America’s political system and work freely, rather than one that functioned as a foreign labor mill designed to depress wages for Americans.
As Trump said during the 2016 campaign, “The time has come for a new immigration commission to develop a new set of reforms ... to keep immigration levels, measured by population share, within historical norms ... and to establish new immigration controls to boost wages and to ensure that open jobs are offered to American workers first.”
Trump made these promises before the record-setting immigration years under the Biden administration and before all the new job gains were captured by foreign nationals. Now is the time to fulfill those promises and return immigration to historic norms. Eight years into the MAGA movement, conservatives should not have to play defense to prevent further increases in immigration after four years of Biden’s disastrous policies.
Horowitz: The coming GOP fight over legal immigration levels
“I’m against illegal immigration, but am all for legal immigration.” It’s the vacuous attempt at achieving Goldilocks political imaging akin to the GOP trope about being for all vaccines – including bad ones – but against mandates. However, specific facts matter in policy, and just like not all vaccines are good, not all levels of immigration at all times make sense. Watch for Republicans to use their pseudo johnny-come-lately tough act on illegal immigration 25 years too late to continue to push an increase in already record-high levels of legal immigration.
After years of record-high immigration, not only do Republicans have no plans to push reductions, but most of them want an increase in everything from family-based migration and low-skilled workers to high-skilled workers, the latter of which they define not as rocket science but as any computer, accounting, or nursing job they believe Americans are incapable of doing. The question that must finally be asked is: How much is too much?
They talk about “streamlining” legal immigration as a euphemism for expanding it, as a supposed means of solving the problem of illegal immigration. The implication is that we have illegal immigration because we don’t have enough legal immigration. But the problem with that assertion is that the period of the greatest illegal immigration has coincided with the period of the most legal immigration, and the countries of origin from which the illegal aliens migrate are the countries from which we take the most legal immigrants. The reality is just the opposite – the more legal and illegal immigration we have, the more an endless number of immigrants’ friends and relatives will want to come. And who can blame them?
According to a 2018 Gallup poll, more than 750 million people would migrate if they could. It’s almost a limitless number. If we are to solve the migration problems from Central America with even more legal immigration, we must remember that the immigrants are primarily economic migrants. There are over 70 countries with a lower GDP per capita than Guatemala, accounting for at least a billion people. At some point we need a cool-off period.
Since the passage of the 1965 Hart-Celler Act, we have experienced five full decades of uninterrupted mass migration, predominantly from the third world, and the wave has not even crested yet. At present, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, there are 47.9 million foreign-born individuals in the country, an increase of nearly 3 million since Biden took office. They compose 14.6% of the population, up from just 4.7% in 1970 and 7.9% in 1990. Together with the 17.2 million U.S.-born children with an immigrant parent, immigrants and their children now account for one in five U.S. residents.
With current immigration policies in place – before any proposed increase – that number is projected to rise as high as 69.3 million by 2060, at which point foreign nationals will account for as many as one in six individuals overall and much higher in many states.
Every year, we issue another 1.1 million green cards, over 900,000 F visas to foreign students, and over 700,000 long-term worker visas. And this reoccurs years after year. The notion that there is not enough legal immigration is beyond absurd. Republicans have misread the electoral tea leaves on this issue for years, assuming that going the McCain route on immigration would get them electoral success when we are seeing the opposite. According to Gallup, as of July 2022, a plurality of voters wanted to see a decrease of legal immigration, and only 27% support an increase.
But even those numbers are predicated on the fact that most people don’t realize just how many immigrants we admit every year. Several years ago, a poll was commissioned asking people the following question:
Current federal policy adds about one million new immigrants with lifetime work permits each year. Which is closest to the number of new immigrants the government should be adding each year — less than 250,000, 500,000, 750,000, one million, one and a half million, or more than two million?
Overall, the combined average for the 25 states polled — a mixture of red, blue, and purple states — was 62% in favor of cutting immigration by at least 25%. Only 25% of respondents were in favor of the same level or more immigration. Some red states like West Virginia (72%-16%) and Louisiana (70%-20%) had lopsided margins. But even in blue states with large numbers of immigrants, such as California (56%-32%), New York (57%-33%), Illinois (51%-36%), and Nevada (63%-24%), a clear majority supported cuts to current levels.
Broadly speaking, most people, of course, are “pro-immigrant.” Isolating a largely abstract and mythical population of immigrants and encapsulating it into a poll doesn’t reflect where people’s hearts and priorities are on this issue. But the answers to very straightforward polling questions of whether we have too much or too little immigration, whether immigrants should assimilate, whether immigrants should get welfare, whether immigrants should learn English, and whether immigration should be merit-based as opposed to family-based are indeed very reflective of where the national mood is on immigration. And deep down, both Republicans and Democrats know this.
That’s why the time has finally come for Republicans to reorient their thinking more in line with the average voter. Rather than focusing on more immigration, they should pass legislation fostering more Americanization of the existing record numbers of immigrants with legislation making welfare use tougher and making English the official language.
Republicans like Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) are continuing to push for more foreign workers. GOP senators continue to push for more low-skilled agriculture workers. A bunch of House Republicans, including those from Texas, voted for a provision that would expand chain migration.
No Labor Shortage: 20.6 Million Jobless Americans Want Full-Time Jobs
Tens of millions of Americans remain jobless, but all want full-time jobs, mostly as a result of economic shutdowns spurred by the Chinese coronavirus crisis, new unemployment data shows. ![]()
Get the Conservative Review delivered right to your inbox.
We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.
Today's top stories