Christopher Rufo cornered NYT’s Ezra Klein — and got him to admit the quiet part on immigration

For years, the New York Times has taken an openly and aggressively progressive stance on immigration — favoring expanded legal immigration, citizenship for illegal immigrants, and asylum protections, while opposing strict enforcement measures like expanded border walls, mass deportations, or reduced refugee admissions.

Anyone who thought otherwise was labeled racist, xenophobic, or a white nationalist.

But it seems one of the Times’ biggest names has begun to backtrack ever so slightly.

Last week, BlazeTV host Christopher Rufo sat down with opinion columnist and podcaster Ezra Klein for an honest conversation about a number of divisive issues, including immigration.

Klein’s surprising comments may be symptomatic of cracks forming in the progressive consensus that treated any hesitation about mass immigration as inherently bigoted.

Reflecting on the interview, Rufo tells co-host Jonathan Keeperman, “I made the argument that it’s totally legitimate to be concerned about rapid, large-scale immigration change.”

To his surprise, Klein didn’t totally disagree.

“In some versions [of white nationalism], ... if you have too much of a country not sharing a common heritage, you lose solidarity. In some cases, we’re talking about something much darker than that, right?” Klein contrasted. “There are people who just don’t like the way their community is changing, and there’s the KKK.”

“But would you say someone who is, like, for example, hesitant about rapid, large-scale demographic change is just a kind of 1% white nationalist? Because that would be, like, the majority of the country,” Rufo pressed.

“Yes, I don’t think it is a problem or unfair or even wrong to worry about large-scale, rapid demographic change,” Klein conceded.

Rufo believes this response is indicative of a broader shift.

“A couple years ago, you would not hear a prominent New York Times voice saying that it is totally legitimate, reasonable, and understandable to be concerned about large-scale, rapid demographic change,” he says, noting how the left routinely scorned such fears as byproducts of “the Great Replacement theory” and “KKK-style white supremacy.”

“Is this a concession? Is this going to be the ... moderate left’s or the establishment left's new position moving forward?” he asks.

Keeperman doesn’t believe Klein’s rhetorical concession amounts to much.

“It does not surprise me at all to hear him concede rhetorically that these things matter, that it’s OK to be concerned about ... rapid demographic change, to have some concern about national identity,” he tells Rufo. “That is meaningless, however, unless it’s backed up by actual policy preferences that he’s willing to get behind.”

Until the New York Times “[makes] some kind of policy concession that would suggest they are serious about taking this concern to heart,” Keeperman refuses to believe the left is sincerely softening its stance on immigration.

Want more from Rufo & Lomez?

To enjoy more of the news through the anthropological lens of Christopher Rufo and Lomez, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.