On a day usually reserved for quiet reflection or ignoring the news cycle, Donald Trump decided to offer a benediction. He did not issue a bland statement about unity or national strength. Instead, he logged onto Truth Social and drafted what can only be described as a declaration of war against fifty-three million people, disguised as a policy update.
The post began with the performative grandeur of a monarch addressing his subjects from a balcony. It ended with a list of exceptions so long, so specific, and so structurally hateful that it transformed the message from a political statement into a chilling notice of intent. This was not a message of governance. It was a manifesto of exclusion. It was a document that read less like a presidential decree and more like a frantic, scribbled eviction notice drafted by a landlord who has decided to condemn the entire building because he suspects the tenants are speaking a language he doesn’t understand in the hallway.
We are watching the executive branch draft a new immigration code in crayon from inside a social media bunker. There is no legal review. There is no congressional oversight. There is just the raw, unfiltered id of a leader who views the United States not as a nation of laws, but as a country club where he is the sole member of the membership committee, and he has decided that the waiting list is too dark.
The Myth of the Fifty-Three Million Parasites
The foundation of this manifesto is a statistical hallucination so vast it defies gravity. Trump asserts that “most” of the fifty-three million foreign-born people in the United States are criminals, welfare recipients, cartel members, or refugees from “failed nations.” He claims that their presence explains every social malady in American life.
This is the “Immigrant Boogeyman” theory of economics. It is a political Rorschach test where every blot of social frustration is assigned an immigrant-shaped silhouette. If you cannot find an affordable apartment, it is not because private equity firms are buying up housing stock to turn homes into rental yield products; it is because an immigrant is living in the unit you deserve. If the crime rate is high (even when the data says it is low), it is because “failed nations” have exported their chaos to your cul-de-sac.
The sheer scale of the lie regarding the “53 million” is breathtaking. It frames nearly fifteen percent of the U.S. population as an invading army. It ignores the nurses who cared for the dying during the pandemic. It ignores the farmworkers who pick the food we eat every day. It ignores the engineers in Silicon Valley, the small business owners on Main Street, and the soldiers serving in the armed forces who were born in other lands. It erases their contributions and replaces them with a caricature of a parasite. It tells the native-born American that their neighbors are not people, but “net liabilities” to be liquidated.
Trump backs this up with a fabricated statistic that would be laughable if it weren’t being used as justification for ethnic cleansing. He claims that immigrant families “get fifty thousand dollars in yearly benefits.” This number is a fiction. It is a mathematical impossibility. Undocumented immigrants are barred from almost all federal benefits. Even legal permanent residents often face five-year waiting periods before they can access the safety net. The idea that the government is handing out fifty-thousand-dollar checks to every new arrival is a lie designed to activate the envy center of the struggling American worker’s brain. It is meant to make the guy working two jobs to pay his mortgage look at the family next door and see thieves instead of fellow strugglers.
The Minnesota Obsession and the Blood Libel
The manifesto then pivots to a specific, racialized target. Trump claims that Somali refugees “took over” Minnesota. He describes “Somalian gangs” roaming the streets, a dystopian fantasy that bears no resemblance to the reality of Minneapolis or St. Paul but serves as a powerful terrifying image for his base in the exurbs. This attack is paired with a renewed, grotesque assault on Representative Ilhan Omar, repeating the debunked and deeply sick lie about her “marrying her brother.”
This is not policy. This is blood libel. It is an attempt to delegitimize a sitting member of Congress not by arguing with her ideas, but by framing her as biologically and culturally deviant. It is an attempt to paint an entire community—the Somali diaspora—as an alien infestation that has conquered a “white” state. It relies on the deep-seated fear of replacement, the idea that “they” are taking over “our” spaces.
The fixation on Minnesota is revealing. It is a state that welcomed refugees. It is a state where the Somali community has thrived, built businesses, and elected representatives. To Trump, this success is proof of failure. It is proof that the “traditional” (read: white) demographic is losing ground. By framing this integration as a “takeover,” he transforms civic participation into an act of war. He tells his followers that democracy itself is a threat if it allows the wrong people to win elections.
The Purity Test: “Loving Our Country”
Perhaps the most dangerous escalation in the post is the call to “denaturalize migrants.” Trump vows to strip citizenship from those who do not meet his purity test for “loving our Country.” This is a terrifying expansion of executive power. Citizenship, in the American tradition, is supposed to be a permanent status, protected by the 14th Amendment. It is not a gym membership that can be revoked for lack of enthusiasm.
But in the Trumpian worldview, citizenship is conditional. It is contingent on loyalty to the regime. If you protest, if you dissent, if you vote for the wrong candidate, you are revealing that you do not “love” the country in the way the leader demands. And if you are a naturalized citizen, that lack of “love” becomes grounds for erasure.
This rhetoric has dark historical echoes. It recalls the denaturalization campaigns of Vichy France, where Jews and political dissidents were stripped of their French nationality before being deported to the camps. It recalls the way the Nazi regime used citizenship laws to turn German Jews into stateless subjects. It is the hallmark of a fascist system to view the “people” not as a legal category, but as a mystical, racialized body from which impurities must be purged.
The phrase “non-compatible with Western Civilization” is the key that unlocks the entire agenda. It is a phrase lifted directly from the European far-right. It posits that “Western Civilization” is not a set of ideas—liberty, equality, the rule of law—but an ethnic club. It implies that there is a fundamental, biological incompatibility between people from the “Third World” and the values of the West. It ignores the fact that the “West” has spent centuries invading, colonizing, and extracting resources from the very countries Trump now wants to ban. It ignores the fact that the current prosperity of the West was built on the labor and the land of the “non-compatible.”
“Remigration” and the Corporate Speak of Cleansing
The solution offered for this crisis of compatibility is “REVERSE MIGRATION.” And just to make sure we didn’t miss the point, the Department of Homeland Security’s official X account amplified the message, posting “REMIGRATION NOW.”
The term “remigration” sounds like a dystopian urban planning trend, the kind of buzzword you might hear at a conference for technocrats who view human beings as inventory errors. It sounds clean. It sounds reversible. It sounds like hitting the “undo” button on a spreadsheet.
But let’s be precise about what this word means. It originated in the European identitarian movement—the intellectual wing of the neo-fascist right in France, Austria, and Germany. It is a polite synonym for ethnic cleansing. It refers to the state-forced expulsion of people who have “foreign” origins, regardless of their citizenship status. It is the concept of “returning” people to their “ancestral lands,” whether they have ever lived there or not.
When the Department of Homeland Security tweets “REMIGRATION NOW,” they are not talking about voluntary departures. They are talking about mass deportation. They are talking about raids in the middle of the night. They are talking about camps. They are talking about the forcible removal of millions of people who have built lives, families, and communities in the United States. They are talking about tearing parents away from their children. They are talking about creating a police state capable of hunting down and processing millions of human beings.
The sheer logistical horror required to implement “remigration” is glossed over by the sterile language. To deport millions of people, you need an army. You need a surveillance apparatus that monitors every neighborhood. You need detention centers that rival the size of small cities. You need to turn the entire country into a checkpoint.
And yet, this proposal is presented as a “cure.” Trump claims that only “reverse migration can fully cure this situation.” The use of medical language is deliberate. It frames the immigrant presence as a disease, a sickness in the body politic that must be excised to restore the nation to health. It is the language of eugenics, updated for the digital age.
The “Net Asset” Test
The post introduces another terrifying concept: the idea that the government should remove anyone who is not a “net asset” to the United States. This reduces the value of a human life to a ledger entry. It suggests that your right to exist in this country is contingent on your economic utility to the state.
Who defines “net asset”? Is a disabled grandmother a net asset? Is a stay-at-home mother a net asset? Is a poet a net asset? Is a worker who gets injured on the job and goes on disability a net asset?
In Trump’s world, a “net asset” is likely defined as someone who votes for him, or someone who generates wealth for the class of people he cares about. Everyone else is a liability. Everyone else is dead weight. This utilitarian fascism views the citizenry not as the source of the government’s power, but as livestock to be culled if they stop producing milk.
It is a profound rejection of the American ethos, which, at least in its best moments, values the individual for their inherent dignity, not their ROI. The Statue of Liberty does not ask to see your W-2. It asks for the tired and the poor. Trump’s proposal would rewrite that inscription to read: “Give me your rich, your profitable, your venture capitalists yearning for a tax break.”
The Constitutional Collision
If this policy moves from a Truth Social post to an executive order, we are looking at a constitutional collision that will shatter the judiciary. The 14th Amendment is clear: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” It does not say “unless the President thinks you are from a failed nation.” It does not say “unless you are non-compatible.”
To implement mass denaturalization, the administration would have to effectively suspend the Constitution. They would have to argue that the executive branch has the power to strip citizenship at will. They would have to create a new class of “provisional citizens,” people whose papers are valid only as long as the government decides they are useful.
This would destabilize everything. Imagine the chaos. Millions of naturalized citizens—people who serve on juries, pay taxes, own businesses, and serve in the military—would suddenly be living on borrowed time. Every interaction with the state would become a potential deportation hearing. The “audit” would not be of your finances, but of your existence.
The economic scorched earth would be total. You cannot remove twenty-one million naturalized citizens without collapsing the economy. You would empty hospitals of doctors and nurses. You would empty universities of professors and researchers. You would empty tech firms of engineers. You would empty entire cities.
But to the architects of this plan—Stephen Miller, Tom Homan, and the Heritage Foundation acolytes drafting the orders—the economic cost is irrelevant. The goal is not prosperity; the goal is purity. They are willing to rule over a poorer, smaller, broken country, as long as it is a country that looks like them.
The Historical Loop
We have been here before. The rhetoric in this message is not innovative; it is recycled. It is the same panic that fueled the Know Nothings in the 1850s, who burned Catholic convents because they believed Irish immigrants were incompatible with American democracy. It is the same logic that drove the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which declared an entire race “undesirable” and banned them from entry. It is the same pseudoscience that justified the National Origins Act of 1924, which set quotas based on “racial stock” to keep out Jews and Italians.
We look back at those eras with shame. We teach our children that those were mistakes. Yet here we are, in 2025, listening to a President resurrect the exact same arguments, using the exact same language of “invasion” and “incompatibility,” and selling it as a bold new vision for the future.
The only difference is the technology. The Know Nothings had pamphlets; Trump has Truth Social. The mechanisms of exclusion have become more efficient, but the spirit remains the same: a deep, gnawing fear that the “real” Americans are losing their grip on power, and that the only way to save the country is to destroy its ideals.
The “Except” Clause
The post ends with a flourish that captures the pettiness of the authoritarian mind: “HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL, except those that hate, steal, murder, and destroy everything.” This “except” clause is the tell. It reveals that the President does not view himself as the leader of the entire nation, but only of his specific faction. Everyone else is an enemy. Everyone else is excluded from the national blessing.
In Trump’s taxonomy, the “haters and destroyers” are not actual criminals; they are the Democrats, the journalists, the judges, the activists, and the immigrants who refuse to bow down. By excluding them from the holiday greeting, he is symbolically excluding them from the national family. He is saying, “You do not belong at the table.”
This is the logic of the purge. First, you define a group as “non-compatible.” Then you define them as “liabilities.” Then you define them as “enemies.” And finally, you declare that they are not entitled to the protections of the state, or even the basic courtesy of a holiday wish.
First They Came
We treat Martin Niemöller’s poem “First They Came” as a historical artifact, a piece of sentimental shorthand for the Holocaust. We recite it to feel virtuous. But in 2025, it is not a history lesson. It is a user manual for the present. It is a precise description of how democratic backsliding works.
First, they came for the undocumented, and we said, “Well, they broke the law.” Then they came for the asylum seekers, and we said, “The system is overwhelmed.” Then they came for the “Third World” migrants, and we said, “We need a pause.” Then they came for the naturalized citizens who protested, and we said, “They should be grateful.” Then they came for the “non-compatible,” and we realized that the definition had expanded to include us.
The siren is ringing. It is low, and it is constant, and it is coming from the White House. We are watching the sequential isolation of target groups. We are watching the normalization of mass expulsion. We are watching the dismantling of citizenship itself.
This is not a drill. This is not a metaphor. This is the policy. The list of who belongs is getting shorter every day. And if we do not stop the pen from crossing out names, eventually, there will be no one left to read the list.
The message is clear. Compatibility is mandatory. Compliance is required. And if you fail the test, the “reverse migration” is waiting for you.