It has begun.

The ICE raids.

And they're not going easy-handed.

ICE has an arrest counter on X.

The first deportation flights have reportedly taken off.

In a sense it's not surprising. President Trump had campaigned so hard on the issue, he could scarcely afford politically not to do it. He appointed immigration hardliners to every key immigration-related post, from Stephen Miller as Deputy CoS to Tom Homan as "Border Czar" and so on down the line at DHS and ICE. And because ICE had essentially been prevented from doing their jobs by the Biden Administration, they had many files on many individuals "ready to go" as soon as they got the go-ahead.

And so it's an easy political win for the Administration. President Trump gets to show not only that he does what he was elected to do, but he does it quickly and very effectively. And because ICE is starting with the people with the worst rap sheets, he does it in a politically bulletproof vest. The face of these early deportations has become a Haitian immigrant with 17 prior convictions. Democrats cannot publicly oppose this, or if they do, then it is even more to the advantage of the President. It's just free win after free win.

And in another sense, it is surprising. First because, rightly or wrongly, it's always surprising to see a politician doing what he said he would do. Second, because, well, as long as your correspondent has been a spectator of US politics, this didn't happen. Throughout your correspondent's adult life, there had been an unwritten law about who gets to move to the US and stay and work there, and that unwritten law superseded the written law. As everyone knew. Enforcement may not have been nearly-inexistent under the Bush and Obama and Trump 1.0 Administrations as it was under the Biden-Harris Administration, but it was certainly lax.

Which raises the question: how long can this last?

ICE keeps saying they are focusing on violent criminals first, but they also pick up anyone associated with them, and in the case of families, it can mean photogenic deportees. Your correspondent has already received a second-hand, but trustworthy, report, of a family's nanny being picked up by ICE.

What happens when ICE starts deporting photogenic illegal aliens?

What happens when ICE starts deporting illegal aliens who have jobs that, under the present system, prop up the economy?

There's an abstract argument that we would be better off without those jobs because it will raise wages, and increased wages are not just good for the people who get them but for the overall economy because they spur investment. Your correspondent tends to agree with that argument. But there's no argument that even if those sunlit uplands of low-immigration prosperity are out there, there will be some economic disruption in the meantime. And it's hard for politicians to follow programs that involve short-term pain for the electorate, even for the sake of greater benefits in the end.

People keep asking about who will harvest the crops, and who will build the houses, but the nannies are the key. Hell hath no fury like a middle class or upper middle class family scorned.

This is the division within the broad tent that was exposed by the Great Christmas H-1B Debate. Every sane person thinks the Biden-Harris Administration's de facto open border policies are indefensible. Every sane person agrees with deporting illegal aliens who are also violent criminals. But precisely because the Biden-Harris Administration's immigration policies were so indefensible, they brought together a wise coalition of sensible people who disagree on much else about immigration policies.

How many high-skilled immigrants should we admit? is one.

Should we really deport all illegal aliens, or only those who are violent? is another.

Conservatives have been bracing themselves for the left's response to a strong immigration policy: endless tear-jerking media reports about photogenic aliens crying as they're dragged into a police van; countless lawsuits; and so on. But the call might come from inside the house. And not just from "business Republicans" (although that will be a big factor).

So: where do we stop? Your correspondent suspects no one knows. But we might find out soon.

Friday Essays

We only recommend two essays this week but it is because they are genuinely good essays that we really recommend you read. Plus, they go well together.

The first, by Mana Afsari at The Point, is an excellent bit of essay reportage through the world of, well, many of the people reading this right now, the world of young men on the new right in DC. So many articles and reported pieces have been produced on this theme that it could almost be a genre on its own, but of all of them, this is the piece that best captures (to use a much-overused word) "the vibe". The combination of intellectual preoccupation, desire for aimfulness and greatness, and the energy, that animates so many of the young people who were liable to go to a conference like NatCon last year and are now liable to be found in the Administration.

The second, by the well-known James Pogue of Vanity Fair, makes for a fine contrast because it's about the other thing: the intellectual, emotional, and dare we say spiritual, exhaustion of the Democrats. It's also full of very funny moments of young Democrat dorkiness.