As @Oracle moves to Texas, it's it's well past time to take stock of what these internal political migrations actually mean--and what responsibilities governors, mayors and legislators have to ensure that the policy conditions which spurred others to move are not rolled back. https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1337513307448750081

But economic policy is only half the story. Relocations in 2020 differ from prior moving trends bc the country is substantially different; it's more divided ideologically now, and bridging the divide between, say, MAGA and SJW is impossible. We have 2 poles, and people choose.

It's a point that's obvious as hell, but it gets lost in the shuffle: TO ASSUME EVERY AMERICAN AGREES ON THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF THE REGIME IS MADNESS. If that's not clear by now to you--if you think it's only tinkering at the edges--you're not a serious person. Sorry, no.

When I say you need to look at foreign immigration to understand internal migration, try it. Take all your assumptions re immigration restrictionism vs open borders, and then apply them to this situation. It'll become pretty clear that, if you were open borders, you were wrong.

You were basing your policy position on ideology so blind and fanatical, it's shocking: (1) all people or potential immigrants are the same as each other in beliefs and values; and (2) all people or potential immigrants are the same as current Americans.

So that's the position you take if you're on the Open Borders, Neoconservative or Libertarian Right. You've subconsciously convinced yourself of those 2 absurd things, and all you need is a mantra like, "America is a nation of immigrants" to paper over having to face them.

If you're on the Left, you have no qualms about what those 2 things mean. You understand you're out to change the people who makeup of America--and therefore the politics and regime of America itself--because it is unjust. It's an adversarial position, but at least it's honest!

If we get back to the New Internal Migration, this still applies--and in spades. Democrat activists are very happy to change the politics of Red States like Texas; they've only spent billions on it over the last decade, and immigration (from within and without) is a key part.

GOP governors, mayors & legislators, tho, seem to take another position. Feeling proud of their low-tax, business-friendly economic success stories, they invite everyone to come and share the bounty. Great. But in so doing, they're accepting the 2 concepts above.

Just like foreign immigration, there MUST BE LIMITS. How much is too much? Does an immigrant from X country or Y state integrate better into the cultural, ideological and political life of the state?

Is it "racist" to even consider such things? The media and the left have taught us it is, re immigration from other countries. When we think about New Yorkers moving to Florida, tho--and the racial component falls away--it's clear to see that the 2 concepts above are important.

AGAIN: Not caring about immigration or migration means you accept that: (1) all people or potential immigrants are the same as each other in beliefs and values; and (2) all people or potential immigrants are the same as current population in beliefs and values.

In 2020, this is indefensibly airheaded. We are in the midst of a year when Blue & Red States approached a world-altering pandemic in 2 very different ways--and were largely supported by their own voters. NEWSFLASH: People believe different things!

I think it's GREAT that they do; I just have no desire to live under Blue governance. Let them be fruitful and get as much pleasure out of hyper-ideological Blue social, economic, and every other policy choice. Go for it.

But, respectfully, I don't want to be anywhere near it. I want, as Phyllis Schlafly famously said, "a choice, not an echo." That's why I moved to a Red State-- and it's why millions of Americans have made this ideological migration over the last decade or more.

Many (or all) of these ideological refugees from Blue States come to places like Texas and vote for GOP politicians. I'm told, Ted Cruz's base of support was from New Texans-- proving that a lot of the recent Blue-to-Red migrants are keeping Texas Red. That's a great thing.

But it's not the whole story. I think we'd find that those Cruz-supporting New Texans were longtime GOP voters from Blue States like California; they came to a Red State BECAUSE it was a Red State--and they are determined to keep it that way. Again, we love these people!

Things go off the rails, tho, when it's large companies brimming with hundreds or thousands of relocating employees in traditionally Blue industries, ex Silicon Valley. Nobody seriously argues that Google or Apple is hiring predominantly native Texans or conservatives.

These are New Blue Texans, and there are New Blue Floridians, etc. For these large companies, a Red State is obviously financially advantageous--they have Red politicians bending over to give them what they want. But is it good, in the medium- or long-term, for the citizens?

I'm not calling for bans on big companies relocating, etc. My mission, now, is to make sure politicians and citizens in Red States understand the stakes. The continued success of your states-- and your way of life-- is hanging in the balance. YOU HAVE A LOT OF LEVERAGE.

Pass legislation aimed squarely at curbing the worst ideological excesses of New Blue migrants to your states. Critical Race Theory, insane diversity hiring, spending to left-wing groups, etc. If they want the advantages of your Red State, force them to abandon their nonsense.